reach. we must redouble our efforts to protect israel, the region and the world from a nuclear-armed iran. these are tough negotiations. of course, they are tough. but there are no good alternatives to bringing a comprehensive, strong and enforceable agreement to fruition. it is extremely important for us and for the international community to stay on that course. through all of this, a commitment must remain firm and open dialogue is critical to that process. i and all of us stand ready to engage with israeli leaders from across the political spectrum. this speech today wasn't about whether we agreed or disagreed but about the circumstances of this invitation and the lasting damage it could do. but it's our job now to get past this controversy to focus on the task at hand, securing the relationship with israel and securing an international

agreement that will prevent a nuclear-armed iran. >> next, i would like to introduce one of the icons of congress, john lewis of georgia. >> thank you very much. in this congress, i take a back seat to no one in my commitment or support of israel and the american jewish community. on many occasions we have worked side by side to strengthen our democracy and fight for equality and justice in this country. the commitment will not change. we are consistently throughout my career for long-term peace in the middle east, a secured jewish state and fight against anti-semitism and hate on american shores and abroad. however this nation is currently

involved in ongoing negotiations with iran. election in israel just about two weeks away on march 17. the speaker of the house of representatives would allow the floor of this chamber to be used to neglect the negotiations of the president of the united states is partisan and not right. several ambassadors as well as the leader of jewish organizations called upon the prime minister to cancel his speech. the speech is an afront to the united states, to the democratic leadership of congress and the department of state. it is meant to undermine the work of our elected and appointed representatives who are the ones responsible to protect the interests of the american people. the floor of the house is a

centerpiece of public debate in our democracy. it should not be used as a partisan tool. and i'm saddened that the speaker would use this historic position bipartisan support of our israeli brothers and sisters by this action. it is for this reason that i chose not to attend this morning's address and it is my hope that today's partisan political low will never ever be repeated again on the house floor. thank you. >> next is january schakowsky of illinois -- jan schakowsky of illinois. >> thank you very much. i agree very much with the goal that iran cannot have a nuclear

weapon. the president could not be clearer and that has been the point of the negotiations with five other major powers in order to make sure that happens. i agree with the prime minister that the united states is israel's best friend. sometimes as in -- as often before the united nations, israel's only friend. and i agree with the prime minister when he said we have to learn the lessons of history and not repeat the mistakes of the past. and so, i want to recount for you some of the words of the prime minister when he was a public citizen, not an elected official in israel in 2002, when he made a major address actually it was testimony before dan burton's committee. and he said, if you take out

saddam, saddam's regime, i guarantee you that it will have enormous positive impact on the region and he went on to say, quote, i think people sitting next door in iran, young people and many others, will say the time of such regimes, such despots is gone. it didn't turn out that way. the big winner of the war was iran. and then -- just last year, the prime minister said -- any way the prime minister said last year that the joint plan of action -- here it is, that we have had for the last year, he said, that -- this is about the

jpoa that we enacted last year, it's not made the world a safer place, like the agreement with north korea in 2005. this agreement has made the world a much more dangerous place. in fact, the joint plan of action has made the world safer by freezing the -- iran's nuclear weapons plans and has been abided by by iran. and so it seems to me with where we are faced right now is a speech as congressman yarmouth pointed out, had many falsehoods about it. but one is the intelligence and security agencies of this country and our allies do not support the idea that iran can somehow unlearn to build centrifuges and have a nuclear infrastructure and that the kind of proposals that the prime

minister were suggesting are absolutely impossible even destroying the current infrastructure of iran and its centrifuges and nuclear capacity would not do the job. the only thing that will do the job is the kind of negotiated, carefully negotiated agreement that has vigorous oversight intrusive inspections and monitoring, that is where we are going. we should be able to continue to lock down and roll back in a very verifyable way iran's ability to achieve a nuclear weapon. that's the goal. we can't achieve it netanyahu's way. >> next up is g.k. butterfield of north carolina. >> good afternoon to all of you. i'm congressman butterfield and

represent the 1st district of north carolina, chief deputy whip of the house democratic caucus and chairman of the congressional black caucus. i speak in my individual capacity as one of 435 members of the house. you know, my first reaction was to come to this press conference this afternoon and simply remain silent and just keep my personal opinions personal. but that is contrary to my personality and so i will simply just lay out some facts that supported my conclusion. i was a judge for 15 years in north carolina and 15 years before that, i was a lawyer. and first thing we would always do would be to establish the facts and then we would draw upon the facts and reach our conclusion. fact number one, democrats, in my opinion, and i know most of them if not all of them, support the right of israel to exist, free from the threat of a

nilings from iran. i support personally the right of israel to exist free from the threat of annihilation. they have the right to feel threatened by iran of assembling a nuclear arsenal. i support president obama to negotiate an agreement with iran, short of imposing additional sanctions. the president is a strong negotiator. that is my opinion. he is a very strong negotiator. secretary kerry is a very strong gashtor. ambassador rice is a strong gashtor and we need not inhibit their ability. it is the protocol and heads of state have standing to invites other heads of state for

diplomatic events. in this case, the speaker of the house extended an invitation to the prime minister with full knowledge that the invitation would be viewed as an insult and rebuke to the president and vice president and secretary of state. the speaker in my opinion based on my knowledge did not consult with the executive branch. i think that is acknowledged now. that is a matter of record. the speaker did not consult with the executive branch, which is unprecedented, and i believe it was intentional. i have received numerous calls from strong allies around the country commnding me my personal decision not to attend the joint session. they understand, as i hope you understand that i have the ability, i'm an intelligent 67 -year-old man, i have the ability to separate my support for israel from my disdain of the protocol used by the speaker

for the joint session. i received a delightful call a few days from the ambassador reassuring me that the prime minister continues to want and need the support of the congressional black caucus. during that telephone conversation, i pleaded with the ambassador to seek a postponement of the joint session, but he dismissed that idea. notwithstanding, i pledge to israel my continued personal support and explained that israel has many friends in the congressional black caucus and do not think that speaker boehner's conduct will interfere with our relationship. based on all of these facts, my personal decision was to watch the joint session on television and i watched every word of it and not attend, because i believe it was a politically motivated invitation. the speech made a convincing case for continued u.s. support and made clear that which we

already knew, that the conduct of iran is threatening and it is unacceptable. i thank you. thank you, mr. yarmouth. >> next is jim mcdermott of washington. >> thank you and good morning. i concur in the remarks of most of my colleagues. but i want to take a somewhat different point to talk about so as not to repeat. the president of the united states's responsibility is to protect the people of the united states. that's his first and foremost responsibility. and in so doing, he has to deal with all kinds of things. when he came into office, we were at war in afghanistan. we were at war in iraq, and he has gradly tried to bring those -- gradually tried to bring those situations down and let

the forces in most countries begin their evolution of whatever kind of government they want. in the case of iran, we have had the president leading a negotiated effort consistently pushing forward in spite of a constant barage of efforts to undermine even before it got off the ground and here we are again today seeing that same thing. what you are witnessing today was a very old concept, if you can make the people afraid, you can make them do anything. and that's what prime minister netanyahu was doing. he was trying to make people afraid and somehow saying that the president wasn't doing his job. there is no evidence whatsoever that the president does not have

our safety first and foremost in his negotiation and his thinking about the future. in that sense, this was a very sad display of political activity being brought into the house of representatives to demean what the president has been doing under great stress for the last month, years six, eight months directly, but even before that how do you get things on a safe position with iran? the president deserves our support and didn't need this today. john boehner ought to be ashamed of himself. >> lloyd doggett of texas. >> the prime minister's strong

speech satisfied his political objectives to attempt to survive in a very desperate election here in the next couple of weeks. i certainly do agree with him that we all stand with israel. it is no more anti--israel to stand here and criticize netanyahu than it is to challenge dick cheney. if you look at what happened today, it is the first time in american history that as many as 60 members of the congress deliberately chose not to participate in this campaign pep rally and far more than that, are questioning the approach that the prime minister is insisting upon. what we know today that we did not know before he gave this speech, i think there is only one thing. he is a rejectionist. there is no agreement that this administration could achieve with iran that would be good enough for him. he wants to resolve all of the many wrong things that all of us

have opposed with iran has been a part of and is apart of today and should only be focusing on nuclear issues. i believe the prime minister thinks that inspectors, no matter how intrusive and how careful they are may not be able to locate all of the nuclear facilities that iran has under way. well, if the inspectors can't locate them, how can he bomb all of them? because the only alternative that he offers really in declining and saying that war is not the option, is complete and total surrender by iran that is not going to happen. i believe we need to continue to pursue verifiable firm, intrusive inspections and we cannot give mr. netanyahu a veto power over what will protect both american and israeli families. the prime minister was wrong

about iraq. he was wrong in the united nations about an iranian breakout and was wrong about the interim agreement that has made our family safer and wrong today. i do not trust war as the best way to prevent iran from getting nuclear weapons. the only approach that will work for the safety of our families is a verifiable agreement that this administration has worked so hard to achieve. the iranians may prevent it, but we need to make every effort to achieve it. thank you. >> earl blumenauer of oregon. >> thank you. >> i was six weeks ago, made it clear that i was not going to dig any file what i think is a political charade and be part of netanyahu's next campaign commercial, like his last appearance was. nothing that i heard as i watched the speech on television

suggests that the majority of the israeli people who thought it was a mistake for him to come or the majority of americans who think it is a mistake to go through this exercise. i saw nothing to suggest that they were wrong. and i think that as our friends in the news media due the deeper dive as suggested by jan, by lloyd, i have listened to netanyahu. i have been in congress to netanyahu. i have listened to his alarmist predictions and listened him cheerlead to the single blunder the iraq war and the extent to which he's accurate that somehow iran controls now four countries. and i think there is some question about that, but the

extent to which they have outside influence, it is a direct result to that disaster and his flawed judgment. he suggests that there is no alternative. listen carefully to that speech and go back and listen. he gave no alternative path forward, just having a series of demands. nothing that suggests that it would have any greater success. i think people ought to challenge his assumption that iranians and americans will always be enemies. think about that. all of my friends who visited iran as private citizens are struck by how friendly and outgoing iranians are. all of us represent people from iran who are here in the united states and who are not necessarily friends of the regime. but they reject that category that there can't be warmer

relations between our countries. surveys tell us that iran is the only country in the middle east where the majority of people average, normal people, still have positive feelings towards the united states. and we have a rich history of cooperation with the iranian people dating well back over a century. but i was struck that the prime minister took all this time to come all this way, all the pomp and circumstance and i listened very carefully. there was not one word from the prime minister about how he would deal with his failure to move his country forward with a peace process with the palestinians. some of us were in israel recently. the majority of israelis favor a negotiated settlement and moving things forward. prime minister netanyahu

repeatedly has failed in that objective and not one word about what he would do any differently. he is lecturing us about how we ought to conduct ourselves in the future when we have unparalleled progress with the potential of negotiations with five major countries aligned with us. and who thinks they are going to continue to be with us if we take his hard line and try to go it lean? this was a mistake and i suggest that congress ought to take a deep breath, exhale, and allow the administration to see if they can bring this agreement across the finish line and they can go forward with more extreme sanctions. nothing is lost by attempting to make diplomacy work. >> steve cohen of tennessee.

>> thank you. i chose earlier not to be in favor of the speech and asked that it be put off because i thought it would be political theater and indeed, it was political theater. worthy of an oscar. this republican leadership team has used the gallery and the house to advance political agendas and give little favors to folks who come to washington. i think it was in january, they had a pro-life crowd come up here on the anniversary of roe v. wade and scheduled a 20-week fetal pain bill and say look how good we are and how much we love you and strong with the pro-- crowd. speaker boehner was successful in submitting his and the relationship with apac and

wealthy donors who were behind this entire speech who are active in the republican party and oppose the president and democrats and i believe the prime minister was successful in getting re-elected and i'm sure this will play well in israel. as far as how it affects the world in reality, i think it's harmful, because the game is in geneva not in washington or on television and would have been better if he took his concerns directly to the president and the state department behind the scenes and tried to get a better deal. instead, he has driven himself and country further away from the president and our country. and i agree with the 200 israeli generals and security officials who felt this will hurt israel, because it will make israel weaker in the eyes of the united states administration and relationship with the president and embolden iran to be tougher

at the bargaining table. so i think the political game was won, but the world game of peace was lost today. i had misgivings at times listening to the speech. as a jewish american whenever the holocaust is brother up threats to the jewish people, i'm concerned, but i definitely feel that everybody is trying to do the same thing and be on israel's side and support israel. and the president has israel's best interest to heart as well and negotiations are the only way you can do it. there was not an alternative except for more sanctions. everybody pretty much agreed -- i watched the speech on television with a bunch of apac folks from memphis and we believe that this regime is rather bizarre in most of its ambitions. but with that as a given i don't think additional sanctions and lack of an agreement would

drive them to their knees. it would embolden them and make the world less safe. >> peter welch of vermont. >> thank you very much. i feanded the speech. i have a strong relationship in support of israel, strong opposition to iran. voted 10 times for new sanctions and to enhance existing sanctions. voted five times to condemn the government of iran for human rights violations, signed letters and did everything to support strong israel and to challenge belligerent iran. and i went to the speech because i was hoping i would hear from the prime minister something that would justify why he came in the first place to give this speech two weeks before this election and why he arranged this speech totally behind the back of the white house with speaker boehner and why he wanted to make a decision that put at risk what has always been

a strong bipartisan approach towards israel and turn it into a partisan battlefield. i came away from this speech disappointed. you know a nuclear iran is off the table. the president has made that clear. in his position, trust but verify. his position, no deal is better than a bad deal. what i heard from the prime minister today was that no deal is better than any deal. i did not hear from the prime minister, plan b. what will happen as an alternative if we have no negotiations? does that mean the military strike and who's involved? does it mean we follow the advice with respect to iran that he gave us with respect to iraq? the biggest long-term mistake that i think the prime minister

made was in embracing a boehner-led effort while he snubbed very directly the president of the united states. a strong u.s.-israel relationship has the support of congress. it needs the continued support of the administration. and why would a friend of america act this way towards the president whose record itself is one of enormous support for israel? under president obama -- and with our support israel has received over $20 billion since 2009 and under president obama, u.s. has provided israel with over $1.3 billion for the iron dome system alone. that was after gaza. totalling $2.9 billion under president obama. and last year it was the united states standing by israel with respect to 18 resolutions in the

u.n. prime minister netanyahu directly challenged the president, who has directly and steadfastly been the friend of israel. and he did not offer an alternative to negotiations, but repudiated those negotiations before we even know what the final deal may be. so this, i think, did not help. and it's unfortunate that the prime minister chose to make the speech at this time. thank you. >> and last, but tallest representative hoffman from california. >> i attended the speech. but i might have well joined my colleagues in not attending it, but almost every day around here there is something outrageous going on in that floor upstairs and i would get myself into a problem if i start not attending if i had frustrations or concerns. but i'm pro-israel.

i voted to support israel and support the u.s.-israel relationship. i have family in israel. my eyes are wide open about iran and the current regime in iran. i don't want them to have nuclear weapons. i understand the threat they pose not just to israel but broader security concerns that we care about. but we have to give the diplomatic solving-problem track at least a chance to succeed. the danger in what happened today, we had netanyahu saying stop trying. don't pursue a diplomatic track with this government. he did a great job of smacking down a strawman deal that doesn't exist. and may never exist. but there is a real danger that says we aren't going to pursue diplomatic solutions anymore. and i want to add one more thing, to hear it from a foreign

leader who has a real credibility problem on these issues makes it that much more trowling mischaracterizations, whether it was last whether it was the original iraq war, we've got a real credibility and judgment problem. to hear the prime minister tell us that the enemy of our enemy is our enemy and that we must always be enemies of iran is just a little too much for me to stomach. so this was a step backward, unfortunately, in our relations i believe, with israel. it doesn't shake my support for israel. but it does give me one more reason to be concerned about the current government of israel and to hope that in the future, whether it's prime minister netanyahu or another prime minister, we'll have an israeli prime minister who not only says he respects our president but treats our president with respect. >> thanks to everyone.

>> for those of you who didn't attend the speech, what did you achieve by not attending the speech? what did you achieve by not being there? >> i wasn't part of the charade. >> i wasn't part of it -- i believe it was a wrong use of the chamber. >> i would say that the house of representatives is the most prestigious venue in the world and to use it for political purposes was something that i did not want to be part of. >> let me just underscore. this isn't a matter of agreing or disagreing with the speaker. we've all been to speeches by foreign le in the chamber which we partly agreed with and partly disagreed with, including prime minister netanyahu's prior

speeches. s that matter of abstaining from a speech that should never have occurred. that's what's different about it. >> make no mistake occasionally the house of representatives is involved in political theatrics. this was unusual in terms of how it was undercutting our own government. >> could i just say, i had an executive session with myself. that's whey did. and i listened to every word of the speech. with 25 members of aipac from atlanta. and then talked with them. i think i did the right thing. >> can i ask you about a point in the speech, when he said since israel has to stand hay aloan -- [inaudible]

>> he made the same argument over the iraq war that it was time for the united states to not pay attention to any world opinion but just to go it alone. what i heard today felt to me like an effort to stampede the united states into war once again. that we should break from the p-5 -- p-5 plus one, yeah, we're the one, that we should break with them and i believe that it was to consider war. >> let me just say that he apparently tried that once before and in one of the only foreign policy decisions of the bush administration that i agree with, the bush administration said no in 2008, according to reports. we need to be clear that that's not an acceptable approach. and i guess the israeli people will decide in this election if they think it's an acceptable approach.

>> i think that's delusional. i mean they have nuclear weapons. netanyahu, presumably, could unleash dozens of nuclear weapons. israelis know they can't go it alone. that's why all of us have voted repeatedly for money and assistance, sometimes when they do things that give us heartburn, like a reckless settlement policy. but the notion somehow that he thinks that israel can just go through this on their own against the world i think based on my limited experience in israel, in fact, israelis don't believe that. and that's why i think a majority of israelis think their country is on the wrong path regardless of how their odd math works out in their final

election. >> there's a statement he had today that reached a lot of people what is the white house going to do both public ahi and with house and senate democrats going forward? >> i think that's the white house's decision. i think all of us are here today because this was in our body and our house and none of us supported that activity. i do think that what you'll see in the coming days is a white house that's committed to pursuing these negotiations and i don't think they're going to let, my guess is they will not let this speech distract them from that, that's the most important thing they have going right now and i think they will just move on and let their actions be the response. >> let me just say, i think at the very least, the intention, or the hope of the prime minister was to, then, force the

administration to make its case in favor of diplomacy. to raise the kinds of questions now that the white house is going to have to devote itself to trying to explain or tamp down. i thought that susan rice did a magnificent job at her aipac speech yesterday laying out what those real choices are. it's very compelling. i was not made -- it was not made on the floor of the house of representatives with every media outlet right there. but i think right now with the secretary of state in geneva, that the white house will, you know have to respond now in some way that wouldn't have happened had the prime minister not made the speech. >> i just want to add if i could, i think the white house needs to keep its eye on the ball this diplomatic effort was going to be tough anyway. i think the white house has told us it's an uphill fight to

whether they can even get to yes with iran system of to allow this to be a distraction set them back further from what's already a tough mission that i think would be unfortunately but i thinky will move forward. i think they understand that this is a prime minister that's never seen a war he didn't want our country to fight and they need to finish a tough job. it may not lead to a deal but if there's any possibility it can, we need to stay focused abgive it a shot. >> you mentioned earlier, the prime minister making the case today for congress, what did you think and this is also a question for any others, what did you think about that decision to use that tragedy as in that way? >> i think it's an overreach by far. and i think he knew that. i was thinking about, and maybe

it's a give and everybody sees it but in political theater, what you had today, especially with joe biden not sitting behind him, was everything the state of the union is, packed house, all the congressmen, and he took the police of the president, spoke from where the president speaks in the state of the union, it was putting him on an equal level with the president of the united states in washington, d.c. and congress. that's wrong and that's why i didn't attend. >> thank you. >> house democrats we just saw held their news conference about an hour after israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu addressed a joint meeting of congress. in his speech this morning he spoke about the controversy over his visit.

>> i know that my speech has been perceived with much controversy. i know many people perceive my being here as political, that was never my intention. i want to thank you, democrats and republicans, for your support for israel, year after year decade after decade. [applause] >> i know that no matter on which side of the aisle you sit you stand with israel. [applause]

the remarkable alliance between israel and the united states has always been above politics, it must always remain above politics. because america and israel we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that chose freedom and offer hope. israel is grateful for the support of america's people and of america's presidents from harry truman to barack obama. [applause] we appreciate all that president obama has done for israel. now some of that is widely known.

[applause] some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-israel resolutions at the u.n. some of what the president has done for israel is less well known. i called anymore 2010 when we had the forest fire and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid in 2011 we had our embassy in cairo under siege and again he provided support at the crucial moment. or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on hamas terrorists. [applause]

in each of those moments, i called the president and he was there. and some of what the president has done for israel might never be known because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an american president and an israel prime minister. but i know it and i will always be grateful to president obama for that support. [applause] >> you can see all of prime minister netanyahu's address tonight on congress at 8:00 p.m. eastern. right now on c-span president obama reacting to the speech.

>> on the core issue which is how do we prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon which is far more dangerous, the prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives. so let's be clear about what exactly the central concern should be, both for the united states and for israel. i have said since before i became president that one of my primary goals in foreign policy would be preventing iran from get agnew clear weapon, and with the help of congress and our international partner, we constructed an extraordinarily effective sanctions regime that pressured iran to come to the table to negotiate in a serious fashion. they have now been negotiating over the last year and during that period iran has in fact

frozen its program rolled back some of its most dangerous, highly enriched uranium, and subjected itself to the kinds of verifications and inspections that we have not previously seen. keep in mind that when we made that interim deal, prime minister netanyahu made almost the same speech about how dangerous that deal was going to be. over a year later, even israeli intelligence officers and in some cases members of the israeli government have to acknowledge that in fact it has kept iran from further pursuing its nuclear program. now the deal that we are trying to negotiate that is not yet completed, would cut off the different pathways for iran to advance its nuclear capabilities. it would roll back some elements of its program.

it would ensure that it did not have what we call a breakout capacity that was shorter than a year's time. and it would subject iran to the most vigorous inspections and verifications regimes that have ever been put in place. >> president obama's comments on israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu's speech came in a meeting at the white house with the new secerer tear ashton carter. you can see all of that tonight at 9:45 p.m. eastern. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> tomorrow morning the supreme court hears oral argument about whether the government can offer subsidies to people buying insurance on the federal exchange. tomorrow on "washington journal" we look at the legal arguments and politic os they have case,

joined by jess bravin of "wall street journal." and then mary agnes carey of kaiser news about the affordable care act. "washington journal" every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern join us with your phone calls tweets and facebook comments. >> you would see what they called when i was a kid a muth and jeff come by -- a mutt and jeff combination or stickball set. washington was a large man. very robust, terrific natural athlete. and madison is a skinny little guy. >> this sunday on "q&a," historian david o. stewart on founding father james madison and the partnerships he made that aided in the success of our fledgling nation. >> his gift i write most about

is his ability to form remarkable partnerships with the great people of his era but it also alludes to his gift to the country of his talents and what he was able to do to help create the first self-sustaining constitutional republic. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." >> the american conservative union hosted its annual conservative political action conference cpac, past weekend. phil robertson from the tv show "duck dynasty" spoke to the gathering after brief remarks from two fox news hosts. >> you guys are going to be awkward behind me. well, here we are you may not

know me but you know some of my famous family members. al and lisa robertson here from "duck dynasty" just came out with their new book, "season of hope" and willie robertson as well you know willie, right? and my wife jill is here as well and back stage we have somebody else you might meet as well. why are we here? i ran for congress and barely lost but along the way i asked phil to help me out with my campaign and so i was taking these different -- i would take him to different events with me where supporters were at and he would always begin with the same speech he would point his thumb at me and he would say i have vetted this one for 37 years, from the day he burst forth from my sister's loins. if you're running for congress

that's not the image you want the constituents to think of you system of he would do this every time we went to speak. the night before the election, we're going on sean hannity's show he said, what do you want -- anything you want me to avoid? i said, that part about your sister's loins, forget that. and five seconds into the interview he said it. i learned something about phil that night. i'll use a southern term here. ain't nobody going to tell phil what to say. s that man who speaks hi mind and how appropriate, sometimes it is embarrassing for me, but he always speaks with passion. i think it's important in this

culture today, we live in america where we are bound by the chains of political correctness. but that's not how this country was founded. we were founded by men like thomas jefferson and what did he say when he made that famous argument for why we should be free from the tyranny of the king over in england? he said, we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are -- what? created equal. and endowed by who? not your senator, not your governor not king george and certainly not king obama. we were endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, among these are life, liberty and as phil would say, the pursuit of happy happy happiness. we can clap at that. i think the original conservative edmund burke said it best when he said the only

thing necessary for evil to triumph, for good men to do nothing. it's appropriate that this award be given to phil, who is doing something, by group and organizations like brite bart and citizens united -- like breitbart and citizens unite whord doing something to advance the conservative movement. so it is my honor to bring larry to the stage right now. >> hello, i'm larry, i'm president and c.e.o. of breitbart network. three years ago this sunday, we lost a great man, a great patriot, loving father, and husband and friend and a giant in this movement. andrew breitbart. andrew breitbart was a fighter. he loved nothing more othan to

stand up to bullies, especially ones in the media. i was there when he told his oldest son, who was in elementary school, if you ever see another kid being picked on you go over and stand up for that kid. if you get in a fight and get in trouble with your principal, that's ok because you're not in trouble with me. andrew would love, would love that this award is being given to phil. a guy who speaks his own mind, who will not compromise his conservative principles and who won't be bullied by the mainstream media or the politically correct police. andrew would also love that this award is being given to phil because from andrew's perspective, the fight was primarily about the culture more than politics. he used to always say, politics is downstream from culture and he would call himself a

reluctant cultural warrior. well $80 million a year in advertising, sales and over $400 million a year in merchandising sales, is a pretty good sign that "duck dynasty" is helping win the culture war. you see, they just don't get why "duck dynasty" is a success. they don't get why this deeply american profoundly religious christian family is warmly welcomed into so many millions of homes every week. so the media will try to destroy them and try to deny their voice but like andrew, they don't care. doesn't change them. and they don't take crap from anyone. you know last year we give this -- gave this award to mark levin who is certainly a fight for the his own style. absolutely. and this year we give to it phil, a fighter in his own

style. i think phil is a very, very fitting recipient of the citizens united-andrew breitbart defender of the first amendment award. we'd like to thank citizens united for partnering with us and giving out this award. thank you very much. [applause] >> well, thank you all. first i want to thank matt and the a.c.u. for making the andrew breitbart award part of the cpac official schedule. this is a big honor for us and a big step for the andrew breitbart award my name is david bosse, president of citizens united and we are proud of sponsoring the citizens united theater here at cpac for the seventh year in a row to show some of our terrific documentaries. i know a lot of you have been in

there over the last few days. i'm really just tickled, i needed to get a little bit pinched this morning because i knew that folks we see on television, the robertson clan was coming to town. getting a chance to visit with them today has been truly an honor. first, before i get to the award presentation, i want to take a few minutes and talk about our conservative values and our principles and what they mean for the 21st century and how we need to rededicate ourselves to educating younger generations about our beliefs especially in the coming post-obama era. america is at a crossroads today and consequential decisions need to be made about america's next steps. these are critical decisions that will impact all of our futures. we must reverse the ma lace of

the obama -- the malaise of the obama era. we must return to the principles and ideals that america is the greatest nation on earth. [applause] and doing so will not be easy but we are an exceptional nation and we can once again be that shining city on the hill. that president reagan used to talk about. we must defend the freedoms laid out in our bill of rights and that's what brings us here to today's ceremony. the first amendment. the first amendment is an enormous part of what makes us who we are as a nation and as a people. free come of speech, religious liberty, the right to petition our government for a redress of grievances. thankfully we have leaders willing to live out that example and stand up for our sacred first amendment rights.

the great andrew breitbart was one of those people. his tireless and fearless defense of the first amendment made him a hero amongst all conservative movement leaders and a new media icon. andrew was my dear friend and i miss him greatly and i know manufacture of you do as well. he was a true fighter for the constitution and the values that made america great. he waged a one-man war against the bias and deceitful liberal media, exposing them for what they are. and it is in that spirit that i and citizens united and breitbart news steve ba non, alex marlo and john conn dwhopped award and are proud to present the second annual andrew breitbart award this year. those who have received it, those who will receive it have

demonstrated a fearlessness to take on the media. a fearlessness to speak truth to power. as we said, we gave it last year to mark levin a wonderful recipient this year is no different. a recipient of the breit bart award must -- -- breitbart award must face down the forces of evil in secular society, they must refuse to back down in the face of withering personal, professional and very public attacks. phil robertson is such a man. he is -- phil robertson is an entrepreneur. building a multimillion dollar business out of the shed of his rural louisiana home before spark agricultural phenomenon with their hit series "duck dynasty." along with his lovely wife miss kay and his sons willie, jeff,

chase, and allen the robertsons -- robertson clan have take then nation by storm with their humor and their unwavering faith. it has been a -- it has been so refreshing to have people who openly love god, this country and put their family first on our televisions every week. phil and his family have proven what andrew always knew to be true. the traditional american values are popular. and given the chance, the american people will embrace them every time. duck dynasty's success proves that and phil's strength in standing up for those values proved that shea defender of the first amendment. when he spoke up for traditional christian values he was mercilessly attacked by the cultural marxists. but phil stood strong and

refused to back down. with the support of his family, he has continued to speak out in favor of the bible and traditional values and "duck dynasty" is going strong. [applause] the first amendment guarantees americans the right to speak freely and practice the religion of their choice without fear of government intervention. and there's nothing the liberals can do about it. i for one am thankful that phil robertson took his stand, by standing up and defending his right to speak to his faith, phil struck a blow for all americans of faith ensuring that religious values and conservative ideals will not be erased from american discourse. phil robertson is not alone in this fight. everyone in this room, everyone across america during that

crisis, took forward and stood with phil robertson and i know that all of us will continue. andrew breit bart knew how to -- breitbart knew how to fight the good fight. he was an expert at taking on the corrupt media culture. and i know he'd be proud today to stand here by phil robertson and his family on that battlefield. ladies and gentlemen it is my honor in welcoming the 2015 andrew breitbart defender of the first amendment award winner, the duck commander himself, phil robertson, joined by his incredible wife, miss kay. [applause] >> don't back down.

>> all of us ought to be able to speak freely where we didn't have to be rewarded for it, right? miss kay, hold my award. you potential candidates now, look, to keep you out of trouble and to keep the scandals down, let me give you a little word of

advice. you carry two things with you wherever you go in case one of you gets to be the president of the united states, make sure you carry your bible with you and your woman. i'm just saying. safety, safety the good news is i'm not running for anything. and as far as i know i'm not running from anything. i'm going to give you three little words that rarely, if ever, i'm trying to think of the

last time, the last time i heard a politician utter these three words was scott walker, but i spoke -- i spoke before him at the same event and i reminded the people of the three words and he got up behind me and he said i'm fixing to move on what that old dude said. the three words that you've never heard from a politician, i love you. you ever heard that? think about it. when is the last time you heard a politician say i love you. i rack midbrain. if they keep this up and they don't start telling us at least every once in a while that they love us, i'm going to begin to conclude maybe they don't.

i sincerely love you and by the way my love for you is not contingent on how you feel about me. you say, well, what if we hate your guts do you still love us? sure. you say, you love us and you're not worried about how we feel about you, not one bit? don't forget that. if you're ever -- let me word it this way. if you ever invite me, some christian people you invite me to a prayer breakfast, you know what i'm going to do as soon as i get there? pray. offer a prayer, i'm going to shut up and sit down.

it's a safer course of action. if you're wondering who i am, by the way, these are my church clothes. i never got around to buying a suit, not yet. i'm 68, you say, phil are you going to make it through this thing without a suit? irregardless of me not being able to go on the floor of the house of representatives without a suit on according to old john boehner, hay, john, i have my best clothes on, boehner, here's a news flash. just make sure you pass good bills coming out of that house that affects my life, and don't worry about the clothes on their backs. just pass good legislation.

i feel better about you. you say who did you come with? who you with? what group are you with? i'll be the father, son the holy spirit. [applause] and sapanero. you say sapanero who's that? in case two things erupt heart trouble or gunfire, you want sapanero there. that's why he's with me. he's seated in the audience. i'm a god-loving bible believing, gun-toting capitalist.

always remember when you hear a guy or a gal ad infinitum attack the results of capitalism which is capital, and you have a steady attack on those people who receive the capital that's what you get from capitalism. you get capital. when you hear someone bad infinitum, you can -- ad infinitum, you can be sure of one thing. he's not a capitalist. i've never heard a capitalist bad mouth the result of capitalism. have you? not one. i got the news that i didn't

build duck commander down there i'm like -- miss kay and i, my four boys, down on the river bank and some dude is telling me, you didn't build that business, i'm like -- yes, i did. and i will add, i will add, we built that business with no government assistance. i can guarantee you that. now some of you are going to think as much as i love you you're going to say, phil our problem with a guy like you is dude, you're just a little too religious. just a little too much.

so for you i'm going to give you a few quotes. the general most earnestly requires and expects those due observances of war which forbid profane cursing, swearing and drunkenness and in like manner requires and expects of all officers and all soldiers not engaged in actual duty a punctual attendance of divine services to implore the blessings of heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense. no cursing in the american army and nobody getting drunk either. george washington said that. he's the father of your nation, for crying out loud.

no cussing and nobody getting drunk in the army, i would say george washington was a pret -- was pretty religious, what do you think? the time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether americans ought to be free men or slaves. whether they ought to have any property, they -- property they can call their own. whether their houses and farms ought to be pillaged and themselves consigned to a state of retchedness -- wretchedness from which no human effort can deliver them. the fate -- he said this in 1776, july 2. the fate of unborn millions, that would be us, down the line, the fate of us will now depend

on -- under god on the courage and conduct of this army. our cruel and mean enemy, the brits, leaves us no choice but a brave admission. we therefore resolve to conquer or die. our own country's honor calls upon us far rigorous and manually exertion and if we now shamefully fail we shall become infamous to the whole world. let us rely on the goodness of the cause and the aid of the supreme being in whose hands victory is. to animate and encourage us to a great and noble action. all was -- oh, was he godly. was he ever godly.

almighty god, we make our earnest prayer that thombings u will keep the united states in thy holy protection and thy will incline the hearts of the citizens. i'm reading you, grand old party what the founding father of your nation said. that the sit zepps will cultivate a spirit of subordination to government and entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow citizens of the united states at large and particularly for their brethren who have served in the fields, the veterans. finally thou will most greatly be pleased to dispose us all to do justice to love mercy, to demean ourselves with charity, humility and pacific temper of

mind which were the characteristics of the divine author he's talking about jesus, of our blessed religion. and without a humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. you must be godly and you must have jesus. grant our supplication, we beseech thee, through jesus christ our lord, amen. that's the kind of prayer the guy at the prayer breakfast should have said. [applause] if i could have -- are y'all listening? if i could have entertained the slightest apprehension that the constitution framed by the convention where i had the honor to preside it fit the

constitution might possibly endanger the religious rights of any of our society, certainly i never would have placed my signature on it. he said, if i'd read that constitution and it infringed on our religion, i would have never signed that thing. i have often expressed my sentiments that any man conducting himself as a good citizen and being accountable to god almighty alone for his religious opinions ought to be protected and worshiping the deity according to the dictates of his own conscience. don't get in the way of religion, according to the founder of your country. there is no room for government to attack it for any reason, according to george washington. president number two, john adams.

suppose a nation in some distant region, your second president is speaking. suppose a nation in some distant region, he wrote this in his diary, should take the bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited. every member would be obliged in conscience to temperance, frugality, industry, to justice, kindness and charity toward his fellow men, and to piety, love and reverence toward almighty god. what a utopia. what a paradise. this region would be. look at us now.

i'm still quoting what your second president said. i'm just giving you a picture of the ones who founded your country, if you think i'm just a little too real scrouse for your blood. statesmen my dear sir my plan and speculate for liberty and i mean there are a lot of them but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles on which freedom can securely stand. the only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a greater measure than they have now they

may change their rulers in the forms of government but they will not attain a lasting liberty. you lose your religion, according to john adams and there goes your morality, we're almost there. in fact, i hate to admit, since i'm giving you the state of the union address, i hate to admit, i got my facts from the c.d.c. the day before yesterday. 110 million -- 110 million americans now have a sexually transmitted illness. 110 million? i'm looking at it and i said, i

don't want you america, to get sick. i don't want you to become ill. i don't want you to come down with a debilitating disease. i don't want you to die early. you're disease-free and she's disease-free you marry, you keep your sex right there. you won't get sick from a sexually transmitted disease. come on. there is a penalty to be paid

from what the beatniks that morphed into the hippies, you say what do you call the 110 million people who have sexually transmitted diseases? it's the revenge of the hippies. sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll done come back to haunt us. in a bad way. i report you decide. i mean i'm reading this stuff from the c.d.c. and it says how many sexual encounters does one have to have to catch a sexually transmitted illness. it says one. i'm like, figure out the odds on that one. how many seconds does it take to get genital her piece. 30 seconds. i'm like wow, that's pretty quick.

aupt godly biblical, medically safe option? one man, one woman, married, for life. and if you hate me because i told you that, i told you my love for you is not contingent on how you feel about me. i love you anyway. i don't want to see you die early or get sick. i'm trying to help you, for crying out loud, america. if i didn't care about you why would i bring this up? i wouldn't care. two minutes and 55 seconds left. i'm not even through with my introduction. this is a warmup.

with a humble count nance and the love though ruler of the universe we must implore him to protect us. thomas jefferson. father of the declaration of independence, george washington, father of our country, now to james madison, father of the constitution of the united states this constitution was written for a religious and moral people. it is holy -- it is wholly inadequate for any other. you know what's happened, g.o.p.? we got too many any others in the white house. it wasn't written for them. some people study the

constitution to uphold it. but there are some who study it so that they can circumvent it. right? stand on the bible. stand on the constitution. don't budge. hold on to your weapons. that's what brought us here. we had to have all three to run the brits back where they came from. we had to have all three when the nazis reared their head. you say the nazis. world domination is what hitler had on his mind. territorial conquest. there was no jesus. none. and they were famous for murder. right?

they went up to chinese, they started running over china, man churea started conquering the islands around them you say what was their game plan? territorial conquest. was there any jesus with any of them? zero. not a man. and they were famous for murder just like the nazis. joseph stalin with the communists. here they come. what were they into? territorial conquest. was there any jesus among the communists? none. why were they famous for? murder. look at the blood we shed with just those three groups, stopping them. and we look up and everybody starts wringing their hands on about this isis thing. and these muslims. you say, what are they into? territorial conquest. they took over half of iraq and

half of syria. they're worldwide over there in africa. you say what in the world are they doing? territorial conquest, sound familiar? any jesus with them? no, sir. what are they famous for? i don't see a dime's worth of difference in any of them. you have to stop them. [applause] i believe jesus came down from heaven in flesh 2015 years ago. i believe he paid for all my rotten sins, and i have a lot, but i'm not the only one. every one of you seated in this audience has sinned. a lot. right?

that's what i thought. i didn't think i was the lone ranger here. so you have a sin problem. you say what happened, phil. i got old enough to know right from wrong and i chose sin. you sinned and died spiritually. what's next for me? a six-foot hole. it's not it. you've got a six-foot hole coming up system of you admit i'm a sinner and i'm going six feet deep. god became flesh 20, 15 years ago. your calendar documents it. when an atheist writes a check out and puts the date down, he's saying jesus was here. you're counting time by jesus of galley. including you atheists in the crowd. we're all counting time by him. you know what he did? and he's the one for whom the cost moss was created died -- cosmos was created.

died on a cross, three days later raised from the dead. the blood takes care of your sin. the resurrection takes care of your fear of dying and you say -- there's a way off planet earth alive. you got a better story? lay it on me. all of these isms. atheism, agnosticism, humanism post-modernism, naturalism idealism, what is all that about? trying to get around what i just told you. your founding fathers were godly so i am i. you say phil you're like george washington. yeah. you're like thomas jefferson, yeah. i'm just saying they were godly. they founded the greatest nation on earth, for crying out loud. and we're sitting around here,

dilly-dallying around. phil what's your overall thing? my god. stand on the word of god. the bible. hold on with both hands. the constitution of the united states. hold on to your weapons. that's what bought us here that's what will keep us here. if you mess with that, g.o.p., if you don't have spiritual men like the guys i quoted and all of them, i could have been here three hours quoting, if you don't have spiritual men making political decisions, you're going to lose this country. we are sliding out of -- at a skile like i have never seen in my lifetime you say this thing is in danger. i haven't given up on it. but the times are getting desperate. we're going to have to suffer through the next two years

g.o.p. we're just going to have to suck it up and suffer through it. you say, but unless -- until and unless we get spiritual men in the white house to help turn this thing around, we're going to lose it. that mightnary is just -- that nightmare is just beginning. if you run out of options you say, phil, would you gut these bue accuracies if they elected you? yeah. would there be any i.r.s.? no. e.p.a.? gone. somebody said what are you gong to do with the e.p.a.? i figure about four or five hands watching to see if somebody is dumping pollution in the river. that is the e.p.a. i'd let the states educate our children and kick the federal government out of our every waking moment in our lives and i would tell them quit blowing our money. [applause]

god help us. >> benjamin netanyahu's speech to a joint session of congress coming up. followed by president obama svs reaction. -- president obama's reaction. benjamin netanyahu spoke to congress tuesday about his hesitations over the negotiations about iran's nuclear program.

>> the prime minister of israel. [applause] [applause] [applause]

[applause]

speaker boehner: members of congress, i have the distinct honor of introducing to you his

excellency, the prime mr. of israel, -- the prime minister of israel, benjamin netanyahu. [applause] prime minister netanyahu: speaker of the house, john boehner, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell, house minority leader nancy pelosi, and house majority leader mccarthy. i also want to acknowledge senator and democratic leader harry reid. harry reid, it is good to see you back on your feet. [applause]

it is true what they say to you cannot keep a good man down. i am deeply humbled by the opportunity to speak for a third time before the most important legislative body in the world, the u.s. congress. [applause] i want to thank you all for being here today. i know that my speech has been the subject of much controversy. i deeply regret that some

perceive me being here as political. that was never my intention. i want to thank you democrats and republicans for your common support for israel, year after year, decade after decade. [applause] [applause] i know no matter which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with israel. [applause]

the remarkable alliance between israel and the united states has always been above politics and it must always remain above politics. [applause] because america and israel, we share a common destiny, of a promised land, cherished freedom, and offer hope. israel is grateful for the support of america's people and of america's presidents, from harry truman to barack obama. [applause] we appreciate all that president obama has done for israel. some of that is widely known. [applause]

like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-israel resolutions at the u.n. some of what the president has done for israel is less well-known. i called him in 2010 when we had the forest fire and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid. in 2011, we had our embassy in cairo under siege and again, he provided vital assistance in crucial moments. support for more missile interceptors during the operation last summer when we took on hamas terrorists. [applause] in each of those moments, i called the president, and he was there. some of what the president has done for israel might never be

known because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between american presidents and an israeli prime minister. but i know it and i will always be grateful to president obama for that support. [applause] and israel is grateful to you, the american congress, for your support. for supporting us in so many ways, especially in generous military assistance and missile defense, including iron dome. [applause] last summer, millions of

israelis were protected from thousands of hamas rockets because this capital dome helped build our iron dome. [applause] thank you, america. thank you for everything you have done for israel. my friends, i have come here today because, as prime minister of israel, i feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people.

iran's quest for nuclear weapons. we are an ancient people. in our nearly 4000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the jewish people. tomorrow night, on the jewish holiday we read the book of , esther. we will read of a powerful persian who plotted to destroy the jewish people from 2500 years ago. but a courageous jewish woman exposed the plot and gained for the jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies. the plot was foiled. our people were saved. [applause] today, the jewish people face another attempt by yet another persian to destroy us.

iran's supreme leader, ayatollah khomenei spews the oldest hatred of anti-semitism with the newest technology. he tweets that israel must be annihilated. in iran, there is not exactly free internet but he tweets that israel must be destroyed. for those who believe iran threatens the jewish state but not the jewish people, listen to the leader of hezbollah, iran's chief terrorist proxy. he said, if all those jews

gathered in israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world. but iran's regime is not merely a jewish problem any more than the nazi regime was merely a jewish problem for the 6 million jews murdered by the nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in world war ii. iran's regime poses a great threat, not only to israel, but also to the peace of the entire world. to understand just how dangerous iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime. the people of iran are a very talented people -- they are heirs to one of the world's great civilizations. in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.

that year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for iran. it directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect iran's borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. the regime's founder exhorted his followers to export a revolution throughout the world. i am standing here in washington, d.c., and the difference is so stark. america's founding document promises life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. iran's founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. as states are collapsing, iran is charging into the void to do just that. their goons in gaza, its lackeys in lebanon, it's revolutionary guards in the golan heights, are

threatening israel. backed by iran, assad is slaughtering syrians. shiite militias are rampaging. backed by iran, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the red sea. along with the straits of hormuz, that would give iran -- just last week, iran carried out a military exercise of blowing up a u.s. aircraft carrier. that is just last week. while they were having nuclear talks with the united states. unfortunately, for the last 36 years, iran's attacks against the united states have been anything but mock and the targets have been all too real. iran took dozens of americans hostage, murdered hundreds of american soldiers in beirut, and is responsible for killing and maiming thousands of american servicemen 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 in buenos aires and helped al qaeda 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 sannaa. if iran's aggression is left unchecked, more is certain to follow. at a time when many hope iran will join the community of nations, iran is easy gobbling up the nations. [applause] we must all stand together to stop iran's march of conquest, subjugation, and terror. [applause]

two years ago, we were told to give president rouhani and the foreign minister a chance to bring change and moderation to iran. some change. some moderation. rouhani's government persecutes christians, hangs gays, and executes even more prisoners than before.

last year, the same man who charms western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of the terrorist mastermind who spilled more american blood than any other terrorist besides osama bin laden. i would like to see someone ask him a question about that. iran's regime is as radical as ever. it cries death to america, as loud as ever. this should not be surprising because the ideology of iran's revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant islam. that is why this regime will always he an enemy of america. do not be fooled. the battle between iran and isis does not turn iran into a friend of america. iran and isis are competing for the crown of militant islam. one calls itself the islamic republic and the other causes of

-- the other calls itself the islamic state but both want to impose a militant empire first on the region and then on the entire world. they just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that order. in this deadly game of thrones there is no place for america or israel, no peace for christians, jews, or muslims who do not share the medieval creed. no freedom for anyone. when it comes to iran and isis the enemy of your enemy is your enemy. [applause] the difference is that isis is armed with butcher knives,

captured weapons, and youtube well iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. we must always remember, i will say it one more time, the greatest danger 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 cannot let that happen. [applause] 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 nuclear weapons. it will all but guarantee 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. you do not need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. you can google it. 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. 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 breakout time would be very short, about a year by u.s. assessment and even shorter by israel's. if iran's work on advanced centrifuges is not stopped, the breakout time could still be a lot shorter. true, certain restrictions would be imposed on iran's nuclear program and iran's adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. here is the problem. inspectors document violations. they do not stop them.

inspectors knew when north korea broke to the bomb, but that did not stop them. north korea turned off the camera. within a few years, it got the bomb. now, we are warned that within five years, north korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs. like north korea, iran is to fight international inspectors on at least three separate occasions -- 2005, 2006, 2010. like north korea, iran broke the locks, shut off the camera. iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a good game of hide-and-cheat with them.

the iaea said yesterday iran refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. iran was caught twice operating secret nuclear facilities, facilities that inspectors did not know existed. right now iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we do not know about, the u.s. and israel. as the former head of inspections for the iaea said in 2013 if there is no undeclared insulation today in iran, it will be the first time in 20 years it doesn't have one. iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. that is why the first major concession is a source of great concern. it leaves iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure. that concession creates a real danger that iran could get to

the bomb by violating the deal. the second concession creates a greater danger. that iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. virtually all of the restrictions will expire in about a decade. a decade may seem like a long time in political life. it is the blink of an eye in the life of a nation a blink of an eye in the life of our children. we have the responsibility to consider will happen when the sanctions will have been lifted. iran would be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could produce many nuclear bombs. the supreme leader says that openly, that iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges.

not 6000, or even the 19,000 that they have to day, but 10 times that amount, 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal, and this in a matter of weeks. john kerry confirmed last week that iran could possess that centrifuge capacity when the deal expires. i want you to think about that. the foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons, and this with full international legitimacy.

if iran's ballistic missile program is not part of the deal, and so far iran refuses to put it on the negotiating table, iran could have the means to deliver that arsenal to the far corners of the earth, including every part of the united states. say you see, my friends, there -- this deal has two major concessions. one, leaving iran with a vast program and lifting the restrictions in about a decade. that's why this deal is so bad. it doesn't block iran's path to the bomb, but paves their way to the bomb. why would they make this deal? they hope iran will change for

the better in the coming years or they believe the alternative is worse. i disagree. i do not believe iran's radical regime will change for the better after this deal. this regime has been in power for 36 years. this deal would only whet iran's appetite for more. will iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and the economy is stronger? if iran is gobbling up four countries right now, how many more countries will they devour when sanctions are lifted? will they fund less terrorism? why should the regime change for the better when they can enjoy the best of both worlds? aggression abroad and prosperity at home.

this is a question that everyone asks in our region. israel's neighbors, iran's neighbors know that iran will sponsor more terrorism when it's economy is unshackled and it has been given a clear path to the bomb. many neighbors say they will respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. this deal will change the middle east for the worse. a deal that is supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation will spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet. this deal will not create a farewell to arms, but a