RSS
Democrats, Republicans Divided on Netanyahu Congressional Speech as US Lawmakers Give Mixed Response
US House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Foreign Relations Chair, US Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), listen as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Craig Hudson
The reaction of US lawmakers to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress largely fell along partisan lines, with prominent Democrats condemning the speech and Republicans praising its message.
Netanyahu on Wednesday broadly outlined his vision for the future of Gaza after the Israel-Hamas war ends, emphasized the necessity of maintaining a strong US-Israel relationship, and proposed a new Middle Eastern security alliance in his address in Washington, DC. The Israeli premier also honored the victims of Hamas’ Oct. 7 terrorist attacks and thanked both US President Joe Biden and his White House predecessor, Donald Trump, for their support of the Jewish state.
Roughly half of House and Senate Democrats skipped the speech, with many making clear they were boycotting the event in protest of Israel’s prosecution of the war in Gaza. Some argued Netanyahu was meddling in US politics or using the speech to boost his own position at home, taking shots at the Israeli premier over social media.
“Netanyahu is not only a war criminal. He is a liar. All humanitarian organizations agree: Tens of thousands of children face starvation because his extremist government continues to block aid. Israelis want him out of office. So he came to Congress to campaign,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) wrote on X/Twitter.
Sanders did not provide evidence to substantiate his claim. A June report provided by the United Nations Famine Review Committee (FRC), a panel of experts in international food security and nutrition, found there was a lack of evidence to conclude that mass starvation has taken hold of Gaza.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, lambasted Netanyahu’s speech for being political in nature, arguing that it serves as a “setback” in US-Israel relations.
“The speech was more a commentary of US politics, rather than a path forward for Israeli and US security. The suggestion that any American who objects to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is a Hamas sympathizer was way out of bound,” Murphy said on X/Twitter. “The downplaying of the humanitarian crisis was astonishing to hear. The truth is that the civilian deaths in Gaza will be bulletin board recruiting material for terrorists for years. That hurts Israel and the US.”
Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to allow tens of thousands of aid trucks into Gaza, evacuate areas before it targets them, and warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas, which rules Gaza, has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israeli military,
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’ widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), a former speaker of the House, skewered Netanyahu’s speech as “the worst presentation of any foreign dignitary invited and honored with the privilege of addressing the Congress of the United States.”
“Many of us who love Israel spent time today listening to Israeli citizens whose families have suffered in the wake of the October 7th Hamas terror attack and kidnappings. These families are asking for a ceasefire deal that will bring the hostages home — and we hope the Prime Minister would spend his time achieving that goal,” Pelosi wrote on X/Twitter.
Israel has been engaging in ongoing negotiations with Hamas — brokered by Egypt, Qatar, and the US — to reach a ceasefire deal to halt fighting in Gaza and release at least some of the Israeli hostages kidnapped by Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7. According to reports, the talks appear to be in their closing stages.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) accused Israel of committing “apartheid” and “genocide” against Palestinians. Tlaib, the first Palestinian American woman elected to Congress, expressed “solidarity” with protesters of Netanyahu’s speech.
“The apartheid government of Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians. Palestinians will not be erased. Solidarity with all those outside of these walls in the streets protesting and exercising their right to dissent,” Tlaib wrote.
The protests against Netanyahu in Washington, DC to which Tlaib referred included demonstrators who burned American flags; expressed support for Hamas, a US-designated terrorist organization; and defaced US monuments.
Some pro-Israel Democrats expressed support for Netanyahu’s speech despite the criticism from many in their party. Republicans in general were broadly more supportive.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) praised Netanyahu’s speech as “eloquent.”
“The Prime Minister spoke eloquently about the shared interests and values between our two nations. The American people continue to stand strongly with Israel,” Cotton said on X/Twitter.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) compared Netanyahu to former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and vowed to continue supporting the Jewish state to ensure it eradicates Hamas from Gaza.
“Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the joint session of Congress today was Churchillian. He understands the gravity of the war in Israel, the existential threat to our Israeli allies, and the staggering risks posed to American national security,” he posted on social media. “The same terrorists who hate Jews also hate Christians. I am proud to stand unequivocally with Israel — they have the right and indeed the obligation to defend their citizens. The US should support Israel as they utterly eradicate Hamas, for as long as it takes.”
Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the Senate Republican Whip, stated that it was a “privilege” to welcome Netanyahu to address Congress.
“In front of Congress today, Prime Minister Netanyahu emphasized the important bond between the United States and Israel and outlined the threats posed by Iran and other malign actors. It was a privilege to welcome the prime minister and stand beside our ally, Israel,” Thune posted on X/Twitter.
Iran is the chief international sponsor of Hamas, providing the Palestinian terrorist group with funding, weapons, and training.
The post Democrats, Republicans Divided on Netanyahu Congressional Speech as US Lawmakers Give Mixed Response first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Conservative Pro-Israel Advocate Charlie Kirk Assassinated at University Event in Utah

Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist credited with amassing youth support for the Republican Party, speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
Conservative activist and staunch pro-Israel advocate Charlie Kirk died on Wednesday after being shot during an event at Utah Valley University, according to a statement by US President Donald Trump posted to the Truth Social media platform. He was 31 years old.
“The great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead,” Trump wrote. “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie. He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us. Melania and my Sympathies go out to his beautiful wife Erika, and family.”
He added, “Charlie we love you!”
Kirk — founder of the Turning Point USA nonprofit, which is credited for drawing masses of young people, typically a reliable voting bloc for Democrats, to the Republican Party — was answering audience questions when a gunman fired off the fatal shot which impacted his neck, causing him to become limp and bleed profusely.
Since the advent of his career, Kirk has been a faithful supporter of Israel, taking on activists of both the far left and far right who promoted rising antisemitism and sought to undermine the US-Israel alliance.
“There’s a dark Jew hate out there, and see it, and I see it,” Kirk told a student during a podcast episode which aired earlier this year. “Don’t get yourself involved in that. I’m telling you it will rot your brain. It’s bad for your soul. It’s bad. It’s evil. I think it’s demonic.”
Born on Oct. 14, 1993, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, Kirk formally entered the political arena in 2012, five months before the reelection of former President Barack Obama, to found Turning Point USA (TPUSA) — which served as a bellwether of declining youth support for the progressive consensus on race, free speech, and economics that took hold in American college campuses in the 1960s.
TPUSA grew rapidly, challenging campus primacy of the College Republicans organization and exuding confidence in conservative ideas at a moment when political scientists and other experts speculated that the Republican Party would decline to the point that the Democratic Party would achieve long-standing majorities in local and federal government.
Following news of Kirk’s death, the Jewish community deluged social media with tributes to Kirk and prayers for his family and friends.
“Please stop what you’re doing and pray for our friend Charlie Kirk. Many in the Jewish community are reciting chapters from the Book of Psalms, and I ask you do the same,” Shabbos Kestenbaum, a Jewish civil rights advocate, tweeted. “Something is deeply broken in America. The political violence must END. GOD HELP AMERICA.”
“We have no words,” StopAntisemitism, a Jewish civil rights advocacy group, tweeted.
Meanwhile, Jewish conservative influencer Emily Austin said, “With deep pain and sorrow, we mourn the passing of Charlie Kirk. May he rest in peace, and may God welcome him into His eternal care. This is a profound loss for the world — Charlie was a truly blessed soul whose impact will never be forgotten.”
Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika, and his two young children.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
RSS
Lebanon’s Army to Disarm Hezbollah Near Israeli Border Within 3 Months in First Step to Restore State Control

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and members of the cabinet stand as they attend a cabinet session to discuss the army’s plan to disarm Hezbollah, at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, Sept. 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
Lebanon’s army plans to fully disarm Hezbollah near the Israeli border within three months, the first step in the Lebanese government’s plan to restore authority and curb the influence of the Iran-backed terror group within the country.
On Tuesday, Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi confirmed to AFP that the government received a five-stage plan last week from the military to enforce a policy placing all weapons under state control.
The move follows Lebanese authorities’ approval last month of a US-backed initiative to disarm Hezbollah in exchange for a halt to Israeli military operations in the country’s south.
Amid mounting international pressure to disarm the terrorist group, Lebanon’s cabinet tasked the army with developing a strategy to establish a state monopoly on arms.
For years, Israel has demanded that Hezbollah be barred from carrying out activities south of the Litani, located roughly 15 miles from the Israeli border.
However, Hezbollah has pushed back against any government efforts, insisting that negotiations to dismantle its arsenal would be a serious misstep while Israel continues airstrikes in the country’s south.
The terrorist group has even threatened protests and civil unrest if the government tries to enforce control over its weapons.
But as Hezbollah emerged weakened from a yearlong conflict with Israel, calls for the Islamist group’s disarmament have gained new momentum, reshaping a power balance it had long controlled in Lebanon.
Last fall, Israel decimated Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, following the group’s attacks on Jerusalem — which they claimed were a show of solidarity with the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas amid the war in Gaza.
In November, Lebanon and Israel reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended a year of fighting between the Jewish state and Hezbollah.
Under the agreement, Israel was given 60 days to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and UN forces to take over security as Hezbollah disarms and moves away from Israel’s northern border.
However, Israel maintained troops at several posts in southern Lebanon beyond the ceasefire deadline, as its leaders aimed to reassure northern residents that it was safe to return home.
Jerusalem has continued carrying out strikes targeting remaining Hezbollah activity, with Israeli leaders accusing the group of maintaining combat infrastructure, including rocket launchers — calling this “blatant violations of understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
RSS
Israeli Military Expert: Doha Strike Was Backed by US and Qatar Coup, Will Bring Hostage Deal Closer

A damaged building, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, according to an Israeli official, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Israel’s unprecedented strike on Hamas leaders in Doha this week was not a rogue act of military aggression, but rather the outcome of quiet coordination between Qatar and the US that could bring a hostage deal closer, Israeli intelligence expert Eyal Pinko said on Wednesday.
The strike, which officials have said was planned months ago, came a day after 10 Israelis were killed by Hamas in Gaza and Jerusalem. Four were soldiers who died in an attack on an Israeli tank in northern Gaza. The separate shooting attack in Jerusalem, in which six Israelis were killed and several more wounded, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back,” Pinko, a national security expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, said in a press briefing.
Pinko contended that while Qatar publicly condemned the attacks, it also enabled them. “I am sure they were involved and the attack was coordinated with the [Qataris],” Pinko later told The Algemeiner.
The most recent round of negotiations to secure a Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal were nothing more than a “deception” by the US and Israel designed to gather Hamas leaders in one place “in order to set the timing to eliminate them,” he said.
Pinko said the strike should also be seen in light of US President Donald Trump’s impatience with the stalled hostage talks, arguing it showed Trump was on board with assassinations of Hamas leaders despite public declarations that he was “very unhappy” with the attack. He also pointed to Trump’s comments from last month, in which the US president predicted the Gaza conflict would reach a “conclusive ending” within two or three weeks.
Qatar, which has long hosted Hamas’s exiled leadership, benefits strategically from replacing the terrorist group’s leaders loyal to Iran with figures it can trust, Pinko maintained. Doha holds billions of dollars belonging to Hamas officials and has no interest in letting Ankara or Tehran displace it as the group’s patron. The timing of the attack is also significant, Pinko said, coming in the wake of Israel’s strikes against Iran’s nuclear program over the summer. “Iran is in a very bad situation. Qatar can easily overcome Iran,” he said.
Pinko further argued that the strike may serve to bring forward the release of the Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza since Hamas itself was no longer a coherent negotiating partner. The terrorist group operating in Gaza had become fragmented, “divided into five families that are fighting each other” and sometimes giving the impression that “they hate each other more than they hate Israel,” Pinko said. Recent talks proved “there was no longer a decisionmaker in Hamas,” and this disarray had allowed Hamas leaders to drag out the process with unrealistic demands. Removing those figures, he argued, would leave room for Qatar to install leaders who could cut a deal. “This will make the negotiation process much faster,” he said.
Pinko’s assessment stands in stark contrast to the fears of some of the families of the remaining 48 hostages held in Gaza, who said in a statement they had “grave fear” the Doha strike could sabotage the chances of bringing their loved ones home.
He placed the operation in a wider context, linking it to the revival of the Abraham Accords and US efforts to build a trade corridor from India through the Gulf to Israel and Europe as a counterweight to China’s trillion-dollar Belt and Road initiative, ending with Gaza as a key trade hub. “Trump is very serious in making the northern part of the Gaza Strip as [having] US autonomy. That will be the end of the American belt and road initiative to compete with the Chinese,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called on Qatar, which “gives safe haven [and] harbors terrorists,” to expel them or bring them to justice, adding that if they don’t, “we will.”
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, for his part said his country would retaliate over the strike, and accused Netanyahu of “wasting” Qatar’s time in negotiations and “leading the Middle East to chaos.”
Pinko called out Doha for its “duplicity” in pretending to be a peacemaker on the one hand, while “fueling Hamas and hatred” in the US and Europe, on the other.
“They are against Israel in their DNA. They don’t want Israel to exist,” he said. “So Gaza and Hamas are a very important asset for them.”
Some critics have denounced the Doha strike as a violation of international law, but international law experts note that Article 51 of the UN Charter recognizes a state’s inherent right to self-defense and that this right is not confined by geography if attacks are directed from outside its borders. The so-called “unwilling or unable” doctrine holds that if a host country does not act against militants on its soil, the victim state may use proportionate force.
The US relied on this doctrine when it killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in a 2011 operation that was widely hailed by Western governments and the UN, whose then secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said at the time that he was “very much relieved by news that justice has been done” and called it “a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism.”