[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 53 (Thursday, May 2, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H2058-H2078]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 404 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 404

       Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on the 
     legislative day of Thursday, May 2, 2002, for the Speaker to 
     entertain a motion that the House suspend the rules relating 
     to the resolution (H. Res. 392) expressing solidarity with 
     Israel in its fight against terrorism. If the Speaker 
     entertains such motion, debate under clause 1(c) of rule XV 
     shall be extended to one hour.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Diaz-Balart) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of 
debate only.
  (Mr. DIAZ-BALART asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 404 is a rule 
providing for the consideration of House Resolution 392 at any time on 
the legislative day of today, Thursday, May 2, under suspension of the 
rules.
  The rule further provides 1 hour of debate on the suspension measure, 
rather than the customary 40 minutes. This is a fair rule that would 
allow consideration, Mr. Speaker, of an important resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I am a proud cosponsor of the resolution before us 
today. It expresses strong solidarity by this Congress of the state of 
Israel. Israel continues to be victimized by acts of terror. This 
resolution reaffirms the Congress' belief that Israel has a right to 
self-defense in the face of cowardly attacks against innocent 
civilians.
  The United States has been a proud friend of Israel since President 
Truman promptly recognized the Jewish state in 1948. If there is one 
issue that unites us in this Congress, Republicans and Democrats, 
conservatives and liberals, it is and it should be our support for 
Israel.

                              {time}  1315

  As the resolution states, since September on a basis proportional to 
the United States population, approximately 9,000 Israelis have been 
assassinated by homicide bombers, three times the number of innocent 
civilians killed in the terrorist attacks of New York and Washington on 
September 11.
  Israel has been under attack in recent months, ferociously and 
viciously attacked. Friends can best show their friendship when friends 
are precisely under attack. Our friend, Israel, is today under attack 
and so today once again we reiterate our friendship with Israel.
  I would like to lend my supporting commendation to the efforts of 
President Bush and Secretary Powell and all of those involved in the 
difficult search for peace. I also would like to thank the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. DeLay) and all of my fellow co-sponsors of this 
resolution for introducing and for pressing for its passage at this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules this afternoon brings to the 
floor a rule such as this to allow the House to consider very timely 
measures. I urge all of my colleagues to support this very 
straightforward rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Frost) is recognized for 30 minutes.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule permits the House to consider today under 
suspension of the rules 1 hour of debate on H. Res. 392, expressing 
solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism.
  I urge the House to approve this rule so we can immediately 
demonstrate our strong support for the State of Israel, bypassing the 
underlying resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, we face a historic turning point in the Middle East. All 
of us, Democrats and Republicans, want peace in the region and all of 
us want a strong vital State of Israel to prosper. In order for that to 
happen, the United States must reaffirm its longstanding support for 
Israel as we attempt to achieve a peaceful solution to the problems of 
the region. There should be no misunderstanding in the rest of the 
world: we are Israel's friend as she deals with the wave of terrorism 
directed against her by her enemies. That does not mean that we cannot

[[Page H2059]]

make constructive suggestions to our ally and work for a solution that 
provides two states in the region, one Israeli and one Palestinian.
  But key to all of this is the clear understanding that Israel is our 
ally. She is the only democracy in the region and has always been our 
friend. And now in her time of need Israel stands virtually alone. Much 
of Europe has turned its back on Israel and few in the Arab world are 
willing to stand up to the radical elements that conduct terrorism 
against innocent civilians, including women and children.
  The resolution that we will vote on later today is somewhat different 
from the original one drafted by the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lantos), the ranking Democrat on the Committee on International 
Relations. Some of us might reword portions of the resolution if we had 
that option. But we would not change the basic thrust of the 
resolution, that America stand by its ally at this critical juncture. 
The procedure chosen by the majority does not give us the opportunity 
to change one word in the resolution. It is unamendable and subject to 
a straight up-or-down vote. That being the case, it is my hope that the 
resolution will receive an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote at the end of 
the day.
  Americans must speak with an unequivocal voice at this juncture in 
history. We stand with Israel in its fight against terrorism, and we 
urge the Palestinians to reject the extremists in their midst and to 
work for peace. We must also reject the pessimists who say that there 
is no solution for the differences that divide Israel and Palestinians. 
The United States is the only nation in the world that can mediate this 
dispute. It is my hope that the Bush administration will continue to be 
engaged at the highest level in seeking a peaceful solution.
  But make no mistake about our role. We are not a neutral bystander 
with no stake in the outcome. We stand for a strong vital Israel and 
should continue to play a constructive role to ensure both peace and 
Israel's future.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Linder), my good friend and colleague from the Committee 
on Rules.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support the rule on H. Res. 392, a bill expressing the United States' 
solidarity with Israel in its ongoing fight against terrorism.
  H. Res. 392 supports Israel's efforts to dismantle the terrorist 
infrastructure in Palestinian areas and reiterates the United States' 
commitment to Israel as an ally by reproaching acts of terror condoned 
by Arafat and other Palestinian leadership. It also demands that 
Palestinian leadership adhere to dismantling terrorist groups. Finally, 
the bill challenges Israel's Middle Eastern neighbors to set a good 
example to the Palestinians by pursuing a policy of peaceful relations 
with Israel.
  Mr. Speaker, I have been to Israel on three occasions; and each time 
I went, the vulnerability and terror were more and more palpable. These 
are people living in terror on a daily basis. We have responded to 
terror in our midst in a ferocious way. We should expect Israel to do 
the same. We simply cannot ask our citizens to continue to live under 
terror.
  Approving this rule that brings H. Res. 392 to the floor is a good 
step we can take as a Nation and we can take it today to help heal 
Israeli-Palestinian relations. I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting both the rule and the underlying legislation.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Lewis).
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and 
the resolution. This resolution expresses the solidarity of the 
Congress and the American people with Israel in a struggle against the 
forces of hatred and violence. It is both fitting and appropriate for 
us today to declare our support at a time when Israel had been 
subjected to repeated acts of terror.
  Israel is our most reliable friend in the Middle East. It is our only 
democracy, a beacon of hope in the region of the world for the freedom 
we all take for granted. Freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom 
of religion, freedom to challenge your government nonviolently without 
fear of retribution simply do not exist. Israel is the only country in 
the Middle East that guarantees all of these freedoms.
  The Congress stands here today to condemn and reject this paths of 
violence led by Chairman Arafat. Instead, we must return to the path of 
peace. Israel must have a partner who is willing to say no to those who 
will use terror and violence.
  Chairman Arafat must take action against those Palestinians who would 
block the path to peace.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished 
friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson).
  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and certainly as a strong 
supporter and core sponsor of the underlying legislation. I am also 
proud today to stand with my colleagues to express our solidarity with 
the people of Israel and our steadfast support in their fight against 
terrorism.
  The people of Israel have become a target of a sustained campaign of 
violence that does not discriminate between soldier and citizen, and 
will yet target the innocent. The victims of this violence are citizens 
who put themselves in danger merely by going to work or conducting 
their daily routine. They are indiscriminately struck down as they go 
to the market, eat at a cafe, or simply walk down the street. This 
barbarism cannot and will not be tolerated. And as a country that loves 
freedom, we can only be supportive of our friends in Israel during 
their time of need.
  Our partnership began with Israel at its very birth as a nation in 
1948, and it remains strong today. Israel is the sole democracy in the 
Middle East; and, therefore, the United States and Israel share a 
common bond. Our connection is strong and deeply rooted in our 
citizens' love for freedom. The connection between our two countries is 
now extended because of a new similarity, our common destain for 
terrorism and our commitment to stop those who perpetuate it.
  Mr. Speaker, last August I had an opportunity to visit Israel for my 
second trip; and as I left my wife was understandably nervous, 
concerned about violence in the Middle East. And upon my return, just a 
few weeks later here on our own soil, Americans, and particularly so 
many communities in my district in New Jersey, were devastated by the 
attacks of terrorism. We understand now firsthand the pain, the 
emotional pain, the physical pain, the economic loss and all of the 
problems and the heartache that come with terrorism.
  It is now our opportunity to stand today to support this rule and to 
support our friends in Israel by standing in solidarity with them.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, when a democracy is under siege from 
terrorist assault, it must defend itself. I am proud of our Nation's 
response to the horrors of September 11. For the last 18 months, Israel 
has been a democracy under siege; and it has responded in the only way 
that any democracy must, it has defended itself. It has not asked for 
this war any more than we asked for ours against al Qaeda and the 
Taliban. But when democracies come under terrorist attack, it is 
morally incumbent upon us as the world's leading democracy to express 
our solidarity. That is what this resolution does.
  Since September 2000, terrorist suicide bombers have claimed 180 
innocent Israeli lives, a number proportional to 9,000 Americans, three 
times the lives we lost on September 11. This past weekend on the 
Jewish sabbath, Palestinian terrorists murdered four Israeli civilians, 
including a 5-year-old child. This was not collateral damage, Mr. 
Speaker. This was the deliberate and premeditated murder of an innocent 
little girl.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no difference between the pain and anguish felt 
by a bereft Palestinian mother or father who lost their innocent child 
and the heart broken Israeli mother or father who lost theirs. But as 
we mourn equally the innocent causalities on both sides, we dare not 
treat equally

[[Page H2060]]

those who act out of self-defense and those who act out of terrorist 
designs. There is no moral equivalence in this struggle.
  Our bipartisan resolution, Mr. Speaker, is not neutral as some would 
have it. It does not equivocate. It draws a bright line between 
terrorist aggression, and self-defense. It clearly distinguishes 
between the side that made a historically generous offer of peace, and 
the side that spat on that offer and started a blood bath instead.

                              {time}  1330

  This resolution is not for those who seek a neutral stance in 
Israel's struggle against terrorism. This resolution is for those who 
are committed to defend democracy against terrorism and stand shoulder 
to shoulder with Israel in our shared struggle.
  In its 54-year battle for survival, Israel has suffered numerous 
attacks like ours of September 11. It has never waivered in its 
commitment to democratic values and human rights. Now, as its very 
existence is again challenged, we must not waiver in our support for 
Israel.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote to reaffirm our strong support 
for our democratic ally, the state of Israel.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mr. Virginia (Mr. Schrock).
  Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the state of 
Israel and this rule. We must continue to support Israel in its fight 
against terrorism. The citizens of Israel suffer undeserved death as 
suicide bombers terrorize Israeli cities almost daily. These bombers 
are not trying to achieve peace. They are trying to inflict mass murder 
throughout the country.
  Mr. Speaker, I have been to Israel. I have seen firsthand the fear 
Israelis must live with on a daily basis. Not knowing whether they or 
their family will survive each day is absolutely unacceptable. Israelis 
have the right to defend their country from these terrorist attacks.
  Having visited Afghanistan during the last recess, I have witnessed 
the devastation decades of war produce. If we do not stand next to 
Israel with our full support, the most stable and successful democracy 
in the Middle East may well fall to ruins like the dusty towns of 
Afghanistan.
  I will not let that happen to Israel. I support Israel, will continue 
to support Israel and urge my colleagues to do the same by voting yes 
on this resolution.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Hastings), a member of the Rules Committee.
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today in support of this rule and 
the spirit of the underlying resolution. While we continue to consume 
ourselves rightly with our own war against terrorism, we cannot forget 
that Israel has been waging its own war against terrorism as well as 
its own fight for democracy for more than 54 years.
  Today, I stand with my colleagues in sending a message to the people 
of Israel that the support Israel enjoys from the United States is 
stronger today than it has ever been. As we send this positive message 
to Israel, we must also recognize the unique role we play as moderator 
in the peace process.
  On two occasions recently, once in February and again in March, I 
wrote to President Bush urging him to personally become engaged in this 
region's peace process, but to my disappointment, I have yet to receive 
a response.
  Early last month I introduced a resolution condemning violence in the 
Middle East. I am not suggesting that my resolution is the end solution 
by any means. However, my resolution does something that this one does 
not. It recognizes that there are things that can be done by both 
Palestinians and Israel that will curb the ongoing violence and 
hopefully get the parties back to the peace table.
  We need to understand that as we embark on this difficult journey we 
need to ask how do we educate and re-educate misinformed communities in 
the Middle East. We, in addition to that, need to bring to the 
attention of everyone the complex manifestations of ongoing violence in 
the Middle East, and we need to bring to this Congress' attention the 
increasing amounts of anti-Semitism and racism that are emerging in 
Europe.
  This is a harsh reminder to those of us in the black and Jewish 
community that the fight against racism and prejudice is far from over.
  Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today in support of this rule and 
the spirit of the underlying resolution. While we continue to consume 
ourselves with our own war against terrorism, we cannot forget that 
Israel has been waging its own war against terrorism, as well as its 
own fight for democracy, for more than 54 years.
  Today, I stand with my colleagues in sending a message to the people 
of Israel: The support Israel enjoys from the United States is stronger 
today than it has ever been.
  As we send this positive message to Israel, we must also recognize 
the unique role we play as a moderator in the peace process. With that 
in mind, I ask, as a cosponsor of the underlying resolution, ``How does 
this resolution bring us closer to a comprehensive solution and 
ultimate peace accord?'' The answer, Mr. Speaker, is that I am not 
certain.
  Over the past five months, we have watched violence in Israel and the 
Palestinian territories spiral out of control. We have watched hundreds 
of Israelis fall victim to suicide bombings, and we have seen the 
deaths of more than 1,000 Palestinians. And while the numbers of deaths 
increased and the likelihood of a peaceful solution decreased by the 
day, the Bush Administration remained largely silent.
  On two occasions, once in February and the other in March, I wrote to 
President Bush, urging him to become personally engaged in the region. 
But much to my extreme disappointment, I have yet to receive a 
response.
  There are many who claim the U.S. involvement will do little, if 
anything, in bringing a solution to this ongoing problem. To them I 
say, if we do not try, then that will become a self fulfilling 
prophecy. The Administration's vacillations in Middle East policy have 
left the U.S. in two precariously unfamiliar positions when it comes to 
the peace process--on the outside and unable to deliver. If we are to 
optimize our chances of influencing Israel and the Palestinians, then 
it must start from the top. The President must accept that the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict is his problem and, ultimately, his responsibility 
to help remedy.

  Early last month, I introduced my own resolution condemning violence 
in the Middle East. I am not suggesting that my resolution is the end 
solution by any means. However, my resolution does something that this 
one does not. It recognizes that there are things that can be done by 
both the Palestinians and Israel that will curb the ongoing violence 
and hopefully get the two parties back to the negotiating table, a 
place that both have been absent from for some time.
  Mr. Speaker, if the United States is to continue down the daunting 
trail of bringing peace to the Middle East, we cannot and should not 
forget to address a variety of other complex manifestations of the 
ongoing violence in the Middle East. For example, Congress must address 
the increasing amounts of anti-Semitism and racism that are emerging in 
Europe. This is a harsh reminder to those of us in the black and Jewish 
communities that the fight against racism and prejudice is far from 
over.
  Furthermore, as we embark on this difficult journey, we must also 
ask: How do we educate and reeducate misinformed communities in the 
Middle East? How do we stop countries such as Syria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, 
Saudi Arabia, and others from teaching hate? Finally, how do we 
maintain the balance of cultural, religious and political differences 
in a region that, historically, has not desired such a balance?
  In the end, Mr. Speaker, I will support the underlying resolution 
because I support Israel and its right to defend itself. Nevertheless, 
if we are to have success in bringing a real and lasting peace to the 
Middle East, then we must accept the realities that I have raised and 
hasten our resolve and engagement to assist in ending this seemingly 
endless conflict.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).
  (Mr. SAXTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Diaz-Balart) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, and I rise in support of 
House Resolution 392 which expresses our solidarity with Israel in 
their struggle to fight terrorism and provide security for the people 
of Israel.
  Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian leadership have simply failed to 
adhere

[[Page H2061]]

to their commitments in Oslo which would require strict adherence to a 
peaceful resolution to the conflicts and renounce the use of terrorism 
and other acts of violence. In fact, the violence has escalated, as we 
all know, culminating in the recent killing of 46 Israelis during the 
week of Passover with suicide bombings where more than 100 additional 
were wounded.
  Yasser Arafat has demonstrated that he is not a viable peace partner, 
and I am glad to see that President Bush is now dealing with others. 
The Palestinian Authority has failed to fulfill its commitment to 
dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in Palestinian areas.
  Due to Arafat's unwillingness or inability to act Israel's military 
action is understandable. Israel has an inherent right to defend 
herself against armed attack and to utilize preemptive measures to 
prevent terrorist attacks on civilian populations, as we have done 
ourselves in our own war against terrorism.
  H.R. 392 demands that the Palestinian Authority finally fulfill its 
commitment to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. It also calls on 
Arab States to declare their opposition to all forms of terrorism, 
including suicide bombings. Israel has already begun to withdraw troops 
from the Palestinian areas and has released Arafat from confinement. In 
response, all nations in the regions must denounce terrorism and work 
to end the violence to stabilize the region if we are to realize a 
lasting peace in the Middle East.
  I am calling on my fellow colleagues to support H.R. 392 to send a 
clear message to Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority.
  The United States demands that Arafat call for an end to violence and 
assume responsibility over the actions of PLO members and prevent their 
future acts of terrorism.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Waxman).
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us expresses our 
solidarity with Israel in its war against terrorism. We know from 
September 11 what it means to be attacked by a suicide or homicide 
bomber. We are fighting a just war 6,000 miles away in order to defend 
ourselves, and we should side with Israel as it fights for its very 
life against terrorists who are sent into Israel from operations only a 
few miles away.
  The only way for peace is for the United States to make clear that we 
will demand that Israel be permitted to exist and live with peace and 
security.
  The second way to peace is to stand up to terrorism. Palestinians 
killed when Israelis tried to root out terrorism in the territories, 
where they tried to root the infrastructure is a tragedy, but innocent 
civilians killed as the sole objective of murderers who are willing to 
kill themselves as well is abhorrent. It is vile. It should not be 
considered martyrdom or simply another tool to accomplish political 
objectives.
  I know many Members would like to have various changes in this 
resolution, but the resolution before us ought to have the support of 
our colleagues, even if they would have preferred a different version, 
because the essence of this resolution is to stand with Israel and make 
clear to the Arab world, we want peace but we are not going to let them 
drive a wedge between the United States and Israel. They ought to 
forget about that.
  Israel has been fighting for its very life since 1948 and has yearned 
for peace. It was willing to accept a Palestinian State in 1948 under 
the U.N. resolution. The Arabs rejected it. In 1967, the lines, the 
Arab world said they want to return to. They found it unacceptable in 
1967 and declared a war against Israel, and Israel won that war, and 
has had the territory ever since, but Israel has been willing to take 
the risks for peace by talking about territorial changes.
  It is Arafat, as the leader of the Palestinian people, who rejected 
the offer made at Camp David and Intaba and, rather than give a 
counteroffer, has gone to war. War should not be rewarded. Terrorism 
should not be rewarded. Only through negotiations of working out 
territory and security can there be peace, not a discussion of whether 
there ought to continue to be a state of Israel.
  I urge members to vote for this resolution. Vote for it because in 
its very essence it puts the United States on the side of peace by 
assuring that there will be an Israel and that it will be secure and 
the terrorism will not be acceptable.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-
Balart) for yielding me the time.
  I rise in support of the rule and the resolution. This is a 
resolution that commits this Congress and the country further to go 
down the path for peace.
  We have had a long and unique relationship with the State of Israel, 
but we also desire peace for all those that live in the Middle East. 
There is no cycle of violence in Israel any more than there is a cycle 
of violence as we respond to terrorists that attack the United States. 
There is a response to terrorism, the kind of response that is so 
clearly in line with the response that we had to that cowardly attack 
on our country.
  This resolution really begins to make the case more effectively, as I 
think recent weeks and months have made the case, that the leader of 
the Palestinians today, Mr. Arafat, is not prepared to be a partner for 
peace. The negotiators on the Israeli government side deserve a partner 
for peace. Palestinians who desire peace, and the vast majority of 
Palestinians do desire, and deserve to be led by someone who is willing 
to be that partner for peace.
  Mr. Arafat's been given opportunity after opportunity after 
opportunity. As my friend the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) 
just pointed out, he was given in September of 2000 an incredible offer 
for a peace plan for Israel and for the Palestinian people as well. He 
walked away from that opportunity. He went back, it would appear from 
all the evidence we see, on the same path of his history in the past, a 
path that promotes and encourages terrorism. Certainly, not a path that 
seeks to end terrorism.
  If, in fact, he is a viable leader, he needs to lead for peace. If he 
is not a viable leader, we need to seek aggressively to find someone 
who can be a viable leader for us to deal with, for us to be as helpful 
as all peoples who live in that incredibly important part of the world, 
seek peace in that part of the world.
  This resolution sends a message to the world of where this Congress 
stands. I look forward to seeing it pass today. I look forward to 
seeing the message even more clear to Mr. Arafat and those who would 
encourage terrorism that we will not tolerate that on our shores, we 
will not tolerate that in the country of our friends, we will not 
tolerate that in any country anywhere, and this resolution addresses 
that.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Lowey).
  (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand in support of H. Res. 
392, expressing the solidarity of Congress with Israel in its fight 
against terrorism.
  Fifty-four years ago after the establishment of the State, the 
miracle so many fought and died for is once again under attack. Indeed, 
the ideals and values are under siege in this difficult time in the 
region, freedom, democracy and human rights, are not just Israel's. 
They are America's as well.
  Today, Israel's fundamental right to exist within secure borders is 
being questioned by both sworn enemies and one-time friends of the 
Jewish state. The United Nations Human Rights Commission, which spent 
most of its recent session ignoring human rights violations around the 
world, voted to condone Palestinian armed struggle in pursuit of 
Statehood, declining to denounce terror.

                              {time}  1345

  Unbelievably, only six nations opposed the resolution.
  But the United States, as ever, must stand with our ally. We must 
remind the world that the Israeli people have been prepared to give up 
land, to recognize a Palestinian state, to make other sacrifices to end 
hostilities and to return peace and security to the Jewish state.
  That is why I join my colleagues here today. Peace has always been 
Israel's goal. In the words of David Ben-Gurion,

[[Page H2062]]

Israel's first prime minister, in the very declaration that established 
the state, and I quote, ``We offer peace and amity to all neighboring 
states and their peoples. The State of Israel is ready to contribute 
its full share to the peaceful progress of the Middle East.''
  The Israeli people have been ready for peace, not just since Oslo in 
1933, they have been ready for peace for 54 years. But peace requires a 
partner. It is clear that Yasir Arafat will not negotiate in earnest 
and will not keep his promises. He encourages suicide bombers. His 
actions threaten the security of Israel and the stability of the whole 
region. And they endanger our own country's war against terrorism.
  My colleagues, we must remain actively and assertively engaged. Our 
message must remain unequivocal. Terror against any of us is terror 
against all of us, and it must stop.
  Just as the United States decisively struck back against the terror 
perpetrated on our own shores, Israel must do the same. We have told 
Yasir Arafat what we expect, and he has met our requests with 
unreasonable demands and promises of violence. He has avoided real 
leadership, preferring to incite terror, hatred, and chaos. We must not 
bow to these tactics. I call on others in the region to put aside their 
dangerous flirtation with terror and push the Palestinian Authority 
towards the peace they claim to support. This is the only way progress 
can be achieved. The Israel-Palestinian conflict can no longer be a 
pressure valve for their failings and for the resentments of their 
people. They must save the region from its path of slow self-
destruction.
  Today, as this long and sad saga continues, Congress will reaffirm 
the strength of the United States-Israel relationship. Let there be no 
mistake why this friendship endures. We both cherish democracy. We are 
both committed to freedom of speech and human rights. And we stand 
together against terror. I urge my colleagues to support this 
resolution.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
  (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise to express some concerns about the process that we are 
going through today.
  I am on the Committee on International Relations, and we have not yet 
had a chance to really debate this. This was brought up rather rapidly 
last night. We had to not break the rules but bend the rules a little 
bit to get this resolution to the floor. It seems like it would have 
been reasonable to bring this up next week, but there may have been 
some other reasons why this is being pushed through today.
  Certainly this would not have been the State Department's first 
choice. In talking with the State Department, matter of fact, they 
expressed some real reservations about this. They said it is not a very 
helpful approach, and they said we need to work with the situation as 
it is to be an honest broker.
  This legislation is one-sided and, therefore, not very helpful. So 
here we are, as a Congress, in a desire to please certain people, 
moving quickly, even though it may affect what is going on in the State 
Department. And the State Department goes on to say that this one-sided 
legislation just comes when in the past 48 hours or so we have been 
making some progress.
  Even our chairman of the committee was quoted in the paper this 
morning of saying, well, if he had his way, he would prefer a more 
balanced resolution. And he is a very, very strong supporter of Israel. 
Of course, I would like to see a more balanced resolution, too. I would 
like to see one where we balance America's interests as well as others.
  There is a lot of talk about democracy and peace. I take a position 
of nonintervention in the affairs of other people. I believe very 
sincerely that it is consistent with the Constitution and very 
sincerely that it works to our best interest for national security and 
for defense; and that even though this is intended very sincerely to 
help Israel, motions like this, resolutions like this, can very well 
backfire and actually hurt Israel more so than they will help.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the underlying 
resolution which supports Israel's response to the attacks on its 
people. For many years, in the early 1990s, I was one of the most 
outspoken Members of this body urging the United States and its 
European allies to act with force, if needed, to stop the slaughter and 
ethnic cleansing of the Muslim community in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I 
believe that we had a moral imperative to confront the Milosevic-
inspired evil and to take action to stop it. I stood squarely with the 
Muslim community seeking international justice.
  I do not choose to be evenhanded or neutral in the face of despots 
who preach death and destruction to others. I believe Yasir Arafat is 
such a despot. In the name of legitimate grievances, he and his 
terrorist allies employ grossly illegitimate means. We must bring peace 
to this savage region of our globe, but we must not achieve peace at 
the price of justice. Justice for Israel, the only democratic state in 
the region, and her people, and justice as well for the Palestinian 
people.
  Today, Mr. Speaker, I join in supporting this resolution because I 
strongly support the right of Israel's people to eliminate the genesis 
of unconscionable terrorist attacks against innocent men, women and 
children. The State of Israel, like every other nation on earth, has 
the right of self-defense. This resolution is an expression of American 
solidarity with Israel as it acts to maintain and secure its 
independence as a free and sovereign nation.
  At the same time, it is incumbent upon the United States as well as 
the international community to continue to work with Israel and other 
States in the region to end this escalating cycle of violence, to 
relieve the suffering of all peoples of that region, and to work toward 
a permanent and stable peace. I absolutely believe the Israeli people 
share that goal. I pray that there are Palestinian leaders who share it 
as well. In his actions and his words, it is clear to me, however, that 
Yasir Arafat does not.
  We must not shrink from our responsibility to stand for a just 
resolution of this continuing conflict, and we must surely avoid making 
muddled mistaken parallels between essentially justified defensive 
actions and terrorist tactics designed to inflame and destroy. We must 
be committed to helping the parties avoid violence and effect peace. We 
must be willing to help a Palestinian state realize economic stability. 
And we must be willing to be an honest broker to achieve these ends. 
But we must leave no doubt that we are absolutely and irrevocably 
committed to the survival of Israel and to its security and to its 
safety of its people. On that, my colleagues, there can be no 
neutrality.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first of all thank the 
majority whip, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), and the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lantos) for their leadership in bringing forth 
this resolution.
  As the men and women in uniform continue to fight our war against the 
terrorists in Afghanistan and continue to face resistance by al Qaeda 
forces, I think it is very important that we reflect upon the words of 
our President which he delivered on September 20. He said that any 
nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded 
by the United States as a hostile regime.
  I commend the President for these bold words and would suggest, Mr. 
Speaker, that our success in fighting this war depends upon America's 
preserving the precise definition of America's struggle. We cannot 
allow for exceptions or conditions. We cannot permit safe havens from 
which terrorists can operate with impunity. And we cannot shrink from 
our responsibility to support free nations under siege, especially 
Israel.
  That is why we are here today, Mr. Speaker. The underlying resolution 
that we are here today to debate speaks very clearly of the failure by 
Mr. Arafat and his Palestinian Authority leadership to abide by the 
terms of the Oslo accords, to embrace nonviolence and to renounce 
terrorism once and for all. Mr. Arafat has been unequivocal in his 
embrace of terrorism. The resolution points to the recent uncovering of 
evidence pointing to the direct financial support by Mr. Arafat and the 
Palestinian Authority to engage in the killing of innocent men, women, 
and children.

[[Page H2063]]

  Mr. Speaker, it is important that we speak up and speak up with a 
clear voice in this House; that we support Israel in its fight against 
the terrorists; and that there is no such thing as one terrorist being 
another's freedom fighter. The intentional killing of innocent men, 
women, or children will not be tolerated by this country.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Ackerman).
  (Mr. ACKERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today with a heavy 
heart, because with this resolution of solidarity the House formally 
acknowledges three critical policy failures:
  First, we are owning up to the failure of our Nation's Pygmalion-
like, romanticized notion that we could transform an Arab Che Guevara 
into a Palestinian Nelson Mandela. In the end, Yasir Arafat could not 
put down the gun.
  Second, we are at last admitting that our policy of one more chance 
was understood by Yasir Arafat to mean that, no matter what, there 
would always be one more chance. We are declaring today that there are 
no more last chances.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, we are acknowledging the failure of our 
countless efforts to squeeze from Mr. Arafat even the smallest 
commitment to nonviolence. After trips by the Vice President, the 
Secretary of State, the CIA director, and the President's special 
envoy, Yasir Arafat still cannot put down the gun.
  Today, Mr. Speaker, we are acknowledging failure. Not a failure of 
our making, nor one of our choosing. But this admission is the first 
step toward realizing our policy toward our ultimate goal of peace with 
security and a peace with dignity.
  We are declaring today that there are no more last-chances left. His 
credibility is gone. His promises are hollow. The Congress, at least, 
has had enough.
  Instead of sharing dreams of hope and plans of progress, as all great 
leaders have, he inspires young people to kill themselves to blow up 
babies and grandparents in pizzerias, or young girls going to a dance, 
or worshipers observing Passover. Nothing can justify the use of such 
evil depravity as a negotiating tool. He cannot put down the gun.
  ``Get re-involved,'' Mr. Arafat and the world told us. ``Get re-
involved and the violence will stop. And so we did. But he couldn't put 
down the gun.
  In February 2001, President Bush sent Secretary of State Colin Powell 
to the Middle East and Arafat couldn't put down the gun. The 
Administration endorsed the Mitchell Committee report, and sent CIA 
Director George Tenet to facilitate implementation of the Mitchell 
report, and Arafat couldn't put down the gun. At the UN, President Bush 
called for a Palestinian state, and in a major speech, Secretary Powell 
elaborated on the President's vision, and Arafat couldn't put down the 
gun. The President sent General Anthony Zinni as his special envoy, and 
the Vice-President offered to meet with Yasir Arafat, but Arafat 
couldn't put down the gun. The President sent Gen. Zinni again, and 
Arafat still couldn't put down the gun.
  And finally, finally, after 19 months of daily drive-by-shootings, 
mortar attacks, rocket attacks and suicide bombings in restaurants, 
cafes, discos and religious observances, the people being murdered by 
Arafat's bombers said enough is enough. Israel has endured what no 
other nation would ever be asked to accept: the daily slaughter of its 
citizens by the very parties with whom others expected it to negotiate.
  And so the IDF was sent into the hotbeds of Palestinian terrorism. 
And the results are quite clear. Just as our armed forces broke the 
back of Al-Qaida in Afghanistan, the Israeli Army has rightfully 
crushed the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure. Not surprisingly, 
there has been a real, sustained and significant reduction in 
Palestinian violence against Israel.
  As did every Member of the House, I hoped that the Oslo agreement 
between Israel and the Palestinians would lead to peace. I still 
believe that peace is possible, but it is only possible if the 
Palestinians will finally put away the guns and bombs and seek their 
statehood at the bargaining table.
  So yes, Mr. Speaker, we are acknowledging failure. Not a failure of 
our making, nor one of our choosing. But we are today recognizing a 
terrible truth: as it stands today, the Palestinian Authority is the 
author, solicitor, supporter, organizer and financier of Palestinian 
terrorism. In concert with Iran, it is an enemy of peace. And what 
about tomorrow? After all, it is the Middle East. Perhaps Mr. Arafat 
can be resurrected as a seeker of peace. But until then, what we have 
done has failed.
  And this admission is the first step toward realigning our policy 
toward our ultimate aim: a just and lasting settlement between Israel 
and its Arab neighbors; a peace with security and a peace with dignity. 
Let us hope it begins today.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our whip, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. DeLay), as well as the ranking Democratic member, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for this resolution.
  As President Kennedy said, ``America is great not because we do the 
easy things. We are great because we do the hard things. A powerful 
Nation fields armies and commands fear. A great Nation advances justice 
and human freedom.'' Our foreign policy is best when it reflects our 
values, supporting democracies like Israel. Terrorists do not hate 
Israel because it is a Jewish state, they hate Israel because it is a 
free, open and democratic state in a region of dictators. Iran and 
Iraq, enemies of the Gulf War, unite against Israel because of her 
democratic model.
  And after September 11, we speak with moral clarity that America 
supports democratic allies in the war on terror. Israel has always been 
ready to sign a peace, but when faced with a homicide bomber, that 
little democracy needs a bottom line, and we are that bottom line for 
Israel and the other democracies of this world.
  In tough times, we served as the arsenal of democracy, and we serve 
as that again. I am proud when America defends our values, who share 
our freedom and democracy, and that is Israel. And I thank the 
gentleman for moving this resolution.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Rahall).
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Here we go again. How many times has 
this body passed resolutions of this nature that are so unbalanced, so 
one-sided. That we become the laughingstock of the world? How many 
times have we passed resolutions of this nature? Yet do we have peace 
today? Do we have peace today?
  I support the state of Israel. I do not support the brutal 
humiliating policies of Ariel Sharon. I support a strong relationship 
with Israel. That is not the issue here today. I support Israel being 
our ally. That is not the issue here today. Yes, Israel is our ally. 
Yes, we have had, we have today, and we will continue to have a strong 
relationship with Israel. But, by golly, we need other allies in the 
region as well.
  What about the moderate Arab allies that want to help us, to whom we 
only cast further embarrassment today by the passage of these one-sided 
resolutions? Let us not shut the door. Let us not shut the door on 
those in the region who want to help us pressure Arafat to stop 
approving of these heinous acts of terrorism against civilians. Let us 
not shut the door on those allies of ours around the world, including 
the European Union, who want to help us, who want to help Israel stop 
these brutal acts against innocent civilians. And I deplore them as 
much as the next person.
  There are those in the region that want to be our friends. Let us 
look at America's interests, number one. Let us look at America's 
interests. Are we furthering America's interests today by the passage 
of this one-sided, unbalanced resolution? Let us look around the world 
and ask ourselves that question.
  I urge defeat of this resolution.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume, prior to yielding to my friend from Colorado.
  I would simply like to answer the question of whether it is in 
America's interests to pass this resolution today. When we stand with 
our friends, and when we reiterate our solidarity and our friendship 
with a nation that is our friend and that is under attack, the message 
that we are sending is that precisely we stand with our friends in good 
times and in bad times and that we are a friend worth having. And that 
is in the interest of the United States.
  So because of our special friendship with Israel, because of the 
history of our friendship with Israel, and the ties

[[Page H2064]]

that bind us, and because we stand with our friends, we are passing 
this resolution.

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. McInnis).
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), who said it the best. When does it 
count being a friend? What is being a friend all about?
  I heard the gentleman from Texas say why is this resolution 
necessary? I will tell Members why it is necessary, because the public 
relations machine in this world is rolling over Israel. They are making 
Yasir Arafat, who is a terrorist, look like Robin Hood.
  Look at the Olympics. Take a look recently on Passover, when they 
send a bomber in to blow up a restaurant on Passover. The equivalent of 
that in the United States is showing up on Christmas Eve and killing 
Santa Claus. What do Members think we would be doing? We would be going 
after them.
  Arafat is a terrorist. He was a terrorist 25 years ago, he was a 
terrorist 15 years ago, and he is a terrorist today. There is only one 
country in the world outside of the borders of Israel that has enough 
guts to stand up to that public relations machine and say enough is 
enough.
  For those Members who have some sympathy for this cause, take a look 
at how these people speak in English. When they speak in English they 
speak in moderation. When they speak in their own language, they speak 
in extreme tongue. There should be no question whether or not this 
resolution is necessitated. It is necessitated by the fact, as the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) said, they are our friends and 
we will stand with our friends against this kind of aggression. There 
is no justification for what that terrorist is doing.
  Finally, in summation, one of my colleagues said I wrote the 
President and the President did not write me back on my solution. Give 
me a break. President Bush is fully engaged in this. Condoleezza Rice 
is fully engaged, Colin Powell is fully engaged, as is the whole 
cabinet. This resolution deserves our yes vote.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Capps).
  (Mrs. CAPPS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, the House is right to condemn the horrific 
and heartless suicide bombings, and to reaffirm our support for Israel; 
but it is not right simply to voice our personal emotions and not to 
advance our national interests. This resolution should be stronger.
  First, it should recognize the suffering of the Palestinian people. 
Many of the 1,500 Palestinians killed in this conflict are not 
terrorists or fighters, but innocent people.
  Second, Congress should forcefully support strong U.S. engagement in 
pursuit of a negotiated long-term settlement to the conflict. All 
suicide bombings cannot be stopped by the Palestinian authority alone, 
nor will they be ended by Palestinian incursions into the West Bank and 
Gaza. Terrorism was stopped before, and can be halted again only 
through joint Israel-Palestinian security cooperation.
  Beyond that, the dream of a secure Israel can be realized only 
alongside a politically and economically viable Palestine. Our own 
national interests demand that the U.S. serve as an honest, credible 
leader towards peace.
  Mr. Speaker, the House is right to condemn the horrific and heartless 
tactic of suicide bombing. The House is right to reaffirm the 
unbreakable bond between the American people and the Israeli people. 
But Mr. Speaker, it is not right to simply voice our personal emotions 
and not advance our national interests. This resolution should be 
stronger.
  First, it should recognize the suffering of the Palestinian people. 
Many of the 1,500 Palestinians killed in this conflict are not 
terrorists or fighters, but innocent people. Surely, the United States 
of America and its Congress consider the death of an innocent child to 
be equally tragic--whether she is Israeli or Palestinian, Jewish, 
Christian, or Muslim.
  Second, Congress should forcefully support strong U.S. engagement in 
pursuit of a negotiated long-term settlement to the conflict. We are 
here to offer solutions, not merely to express emotions. All suicide 
bombings cannot be stopped by the Palestinian Authority alone. Nor will 
they be ended by Israeli incursions into the West Bank and Gaza.
  Terrorism was stopped before--and can be halted again--through joint 
Israeli-Palestinian security cooperation. Let us not forget that when 
Israel and the Palestinian Authority were combating terror together, 
under the watchful eye of our CIA, Israelis enjoyed three of the most 
peaceful years in their history. That ended when the peace process 
collapsed. These peaceful days will only return in the context of a 
vigorous, renewed peace process led by the United States. The dream of 
a safe and secure Israel can be realized only alongside an economically 
and politically viable Palestine. And this will only become reality if 
our country--and our President--is fully engaged in diplomacy.
  Last night, the flames at the Church of the Nativity were a stark and 
vivid reminder that the cycle of violence in the Middle East threatens 
to spiral out of control. But the agreement to end the situation in 
Ramallah, secured by the United States, reminds us of the valuable role 
U.S. intervention can play.
  Today, the United States is engaged in a critical war against 
terrorism. In my view, the fight against global terror will only be 
strengthened when we secure a just and lasting peace agreement between 
Israel and the Palestinians. For the sake of the Israeli and 
Palestinian peoples--and for our own sake--the U.S. government must be 
an honest, credible leader toward the path of peace. Our national 
interests give us no alternative.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Weldon).
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to rise 
not only in support of this resolution, but to be one of the original 
cosponsors or one of the sponsors of the resolution.
  Let me just point out that I do not have a large Jewish community in 
my district. The vast majority probably do not vote for me. I am not 
here to win friends, I am here to do what is right. This resolution 
speaks the truth. There are some people who are not going to be happy 
with this resolution. I can understand why, because it speaks the 
truth. It says ``Yasir Arafat and the members of the Palestinian 
leadership have failed to abide by their commitments to nonviolence 
made in the Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles (the Oslo Accord).''
  Jeepers, they have not only failed, Yasir Arafat goes on the radio 
calling for more martyrs. Young people strapping bombs around their 
waists going into restaurants and supermarkets, blowing up innocent 
women and children, and he is calling for more of that. To say he is a 
terrorist is an understatement. I mean, this resolution goes on to talk 
about the Karine-A affair, how they were trying to import into the 
Palestinian authority tons of weapons.
  Mr. Speaker, we tend to gloss over the fact why we support Israel, 
and we will frequently just say Israel is a democracy, and then we move 
on to the next sentence. We need to dwell on that issue for awhile. To 
my knowledge, there have never been two democracies that have fought 
each other. There has never been a democracy that have done the 
horrible things the Palestinian authority has perpetrated against 
Israel. We have given the Muslim world a pass for too long. 1.2 billion 
people living under dictatorships where they have no freedom of speech, 
they have no freedom of religion, or political freedoms. This is the 
right resolution. This is the people's House. We listen to the people. 
The people want us to stand by Israel.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).
  (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to 
this resolution, and say that I would have preferred Members to have 
had an opportunity to vote on H. Res. 405 by the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support and proud 
cosponsor of H. Res. 392. Israel is under a state of siege from 
terrorist forces in the West Bank and Gaza. Palestinian offices in 
Ramallah harbored the accused assassins of an Israeli cabinet minister. 
The Palestinian authority proudly pays for posters to put up in

[[Page H2065]]

their cities glorifying these terrorist activities; they call them 
martyrs.
  The way to peace in a Palestinian state is not through terror. If the 
Arab League wants to advance the peace process, they need to tell their 
membership to stop financing terrorism against Israel and stop 
demonizing the Jewish people. The Arab League needs to stop supporting 
terrorist organizations, stop funding suicide bombers on the West Bank 
and Gaza, and stop paying rewards for the attacks.
  Everybody speaks about peace in front of the cameras, but continues 
to secretly fund terrorist organizations against Israel. I support 
Israel's right to defend their citizens and support their operations to 
destroy the terrorist infrastructure which has been created by the 
Palestinian Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, Mr. Arafat could stop the violence if he restrained his 
forces and used his powers for construction instead of destruction. 
Israel only went on the offensive as a reflexive action to stop 
escalating terrorist attacks. If there are no more attacks, Israel is 
more than willing to restart the peace process. This resolution needs 
to be passed.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution 
which is one-sided and will not further the cause of peace. This 
resolution undermines President Bush's efforts to bring both sides 
together as an honest broker. Instead of compromising, this one-sided 
resolution will encourage excesses on both sides. It is anti-peace.
  Clearly all of us are overwhelmed with a sense of outrage over the 
terrorist bombings that have left so many Israeli women and children, 
elderly people and other noncombatants dead or wounded. Strapping a 
bomb onto a young person and sending them out to blow up a Pizza Hut or 
a bus and to kill other noncombatants in order to terrorize a 
population is despicable beyond words.
  But if we are going to bring peace to that troubled region, we must 
be scrupulously honest. There are piles of bodies in the Middle East. 
Many of the victims are noncombatants, and both sides of the conflict 
have engaged in the slaughter of innocents. I know the retort that many 
will use that the elderly and the children that have been killed by the 
Israeli Army was unintentional. Collateral damage. I have searched my 
heart to accept this argument. I cannot accept it.
  I am asking my colleagues to search their hearts. Should we not be 
doing what we can to end the cycle of violence as our President and 
Secretary of State have been trying to do? We must seek out the good-
hearted people on both sides rather than encourage the radicals and 
hate mongers on both sides, which this resolution will do.
  I am sorry, but I do not put Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat in the camp of 
the good-hearted. The last thing we should do is give Mr. Sharon a 
green light to unleash his total war on the Palestinian people. The 
fact of life is that the Palestinians are not going to disappear, that 
Israel is not going to be driven into the sea. We need to bring both 
sides together in a spirit of peace and compromise. This resolution 
goes in the opposite direction.
  No one has been more committed towards ending the Taliban and al 
Qaeda terrorist regime, or getting rid of Saddam Hussein than I have 
been. But this is a different situation, and we will fail unless we go 
at it as peacemakers. This is a pro-war resolution for a conflict that 
cannot be won. Let us be peacemakers and do the right thing.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
  (Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, there is not enough time for all Members to 
speak, but I include my remarks for the Record. And I would just add, 
there have been no hearings on the underlying resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, for over a month I have worked more intensively on this 
controversy than on any of the other pressing matters before us. My 
effort has been to convince my colleagues that--despite the very strong 
feelings many of them have on this matter--it is crucial that we 
promote and engage in honest dialogue. That dialogue must be marked by 
as much mutual respect as we can muster, and by a continuing effort to 
understand viewpoints we may not share.
  Finger-pointing, reciting historical claims and hurtling charges may 
seem totally justified and important to express. But surely the goals 
of halting violence to achieve a resolution of the disputes requires 
that my words spoken here and my conduct are consistent with the 
necessity of having a dialogue in the Congress and in the Nation, as 
well.
  Over the course of the last 5 weeks, I have spoken with many 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and on both sides of the 
capitol, urging that we create an inclusive forum in which different 
views could be freely expressed. On this controversial issue, it can 
truly be said, as Dr. King once reminded us, that: ``We are caught in 
an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of 
destiny.''
  My conversations have included the senior Senators from Delaware and 
South Dakota; the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde); the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Gilman), and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. 
Rahall.) With the gentlelady from California (Ms. Woolsey) and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), I have been convening a series 
of weekly meetings with colleagues, to which all members have been 
invited, and also attended by representatives of Jewish, Muslim, 
Protestant and Catholic religious institutions and organization deeply 
concerned about the Middle East crisis. All attendees at those meetings 
have agreed on the importance of maintaining real dialogue and 
minimizing emotional exchanges that are inflammatory or divisive.
  I supported the creation of the State of Israel. My continuing 
support of its security, safety and viability has never wavered. At the 
same time, my dedication to America's playing its proper role in the 
pursuit of a just, equitable and lasting peace for all people in the 
region is equally well known.
  I am sure that my colleagues share these goals but at this delicate 
time, I have concluded that this resolution, however well-intentioned, 
would be counterproductive to achieving them. I also am convinced that 
the Israeli Government and people know that the United States' 
commitment to their security and survival is steadfast and will remain 
so.
  I agree, that this President, like his predecessors, should be given 
the maximum flexibility--to maintain the credibility of the United 
States with all parties and to preserve the ability to broker a 
permanent resolution, with equal conviction, I urge the President to 
use those capabilities to the fullest.
  Mr. Speaker, it simply defies belief that, during these perilous 
times, the legislative bodies of the single nation on earth that can 
bring this crisis to closure would compromise that nation's ability to 
do so.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and resolution 
expressing solidarity with the state of Israel. Israel has been subject 
to the most horrendous series of terrorist attacks: Weekly suicide 
bombings targeting civilians in cafes, on buses and in markets; gunmen 
who go from home to home in search of innocent victims.
  Today we resolve not only to support Israel in its time of need, our 
lone democratic ally in the region, but also to speak in a clear voice 
against the universal scourge of terrorism. As we saw on September 11, 
no nation, not even the most mighty, is immune from the poison of 
terrorism. We must realize that a threat to the life of civilians 
anywhere is a threat to civilization everywhere. I urge support of the 
resolution.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I pray for the peace of Jerusalem almost 
every day. As I listen to the gentleman from California speak about the 
tragic loss of life on both sides of this conflict, I know of his 
sincerity and greatly appreciate it.
  But I rise today as an original cosponsor of the resolution; and more 
than that, I rise in support of the dream that is Israel. It is a dream 
that I would say with great respect to the Members of this institution 
of Jewish descent and ethnicity, that it is a dream shared by the 
overwhelming majority of all Americans, the dream that is Israel that 
languished for 1,800 years in the heart of the people known as the 
apple of God's eye.
  It was a dream that in the wake of the brutality and the horror of 
the Holocaust, this Nation responded to, returning the people of Israel 
to their historic homeland in 1948, and there did

[[Page H2066]]

we become a partner with this nation, as no other nation partnered in 
the history of the world.
  Yes, we should stand with Israel because she is the lone democracy in 
this part of the world. Yes, we should stand with Israel because she is 
a liberal democracy to boot. But mostly, Mr. Speaker, I believe we 
should stand with Israel today because this Congress is simply a 
megaphone for the heart of the American people.

                              {time}  1415

  This well should resonate with the hearts of our countrymen who 
believe in so many small buckboard churches that dot the landscape of 
districts like mine, that those who bless her, He will still bless, and 
those who cures her, He will cures.
  Let us this day by this resolution send a deafening message from the 
heart of the American people to the world, that America stands with 
Israel in this, her darkest hour.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and resolution. As 
Yasir Arafat plays the role of victim before the cameras of CNN, he 
continues to create a successor generation of Palestinian homicide 
bombers. These homicide bombers are indoctrinated by the curriculum of 
killing, the dialogue of death, the textbooks of terror poisoning the 
minds of the children of the West Bank and Gaza.
  In the official textbook, ``Our Country Palestine,'' it says, ``There 
is no alternative to the destruction of the State of Israel.'' In the 
Palestinian textbook entitled, ``Our Arabic Language,'' a subject for a 
composition is ``How are we going to liberate our stolen homeland?''
  Mr. Speaker, if one wishes to find a breeding ground of teenage 
suicide bombers, one need not look beyond the state-control of the 
Palestinian National Authority. Chairman Arafat's record should not be 
graded by his pathetic public relations hypocrisy, but rather by the 
progress he makes in second grade classrooms throughout the West Bank 
and Gaza.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I stand today without shame in 
support of this resolution. I stand today without shame in support of 
the ability of Israel to defend itself and to stand free and 
democratic. And I also stand without shame in recognizing the humanity 
and dignity of the Palestinian people. And for anyone to say that this 
resolution would act against peace and negotiations is wrong, because 
there is no way to prevent people who truly want peace to come to the 
table and negotiate.
  I believe we should have engagement. President Bush, it is vital that 
Secretary Powell should go with this Nation's full support back to the 
Mideast. President William Jefferson Clinton should be asked for his 
involvement in this enormous challenge. We must do all to ensure that 
peace occurs.
  So today let me simply say that I want to speak in the words of the 
late Prime Minister Rabin, spoken at Oslo in 1994, ``We are in the 
midst of building the peace. The architects and engineers of this 
enterprise are engaged in their work, even as we gather here tonight, 
building the peace, layer by layer, brick by brick. The job is 
difficult, complex, trying. Mistakes could topple the whole structure 
and bring disaster down upon us. And so we are determined to do the job 
well, despite the toil of murderous terrorism, despite the fanatic and 
cruel enemies of peace. We will pursue the course of peace,'' Mr. 
Speaker, ``with determination and fortitude, and we will prevail.''
  That is what this vote stands for. We will prevail for peace and a 
free democratic and secure Israel and a freestanding peaceful 
Palestinian state. America is at its best when we can bring our power 
to bear to save lives and preserve the dignity of all peoples.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution. I believe in 
Israel and its right to self-defense with the understanding that Israel 
must be engaged in crafting a comprehensive and lasting peace agreement 
in the Middle East. We must also consider the humanity of the 
Palestinian people and the need for an in depth, thoughtful statement 
on how the violence in the Middle East must stop. The United States 
must be actively engaged in the peace process and broker a new 
understanding between the Israeli and Palestinian people. This type of 
peace agreement will take real compromise and risk on all sides and a 
strong and continued effort by the United States in shepherding the 
parties through the process.
  In engaging in the peace process, the United States must use all the 
resources at its disposal in a way to be helpful, President Bush is 
vital, past President William Jefferson Clinton can bring much, and 
Secretary Colin Powell must return now to the Middle East with the full 
support of this nation. This is the type of event that history is made 
of, where historic agreements such as the Oslo Agreements with the 
Palestinians and the Treaty of Peace with Jordan arose. We need 
eloquent words indicating true peace and respect for life such as those 
spoken by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin upon receiving the Nobel Peace 
Prize in Oslo in 1994,

       We are in the midst of building the peace. The architects 
     and the engineers of this enterprise are engaged in their 
     work even as we gather here tonight, building the peace, 
     layer by layer, brick by brick. The job is difficult, 
     complex, trying. Mistakes could topple the whole structure 
     and bring disaster down upon us. And so we are determined to 
     do the job well-despite the toll of murderous terrorism, 
     despite the fanatic and cruel enemies of peace. We will 
     pursue the course of peace with determination and fortitude. 
     We will not let up. We will not give in. Peace will triumph 
     over all its enemies, because the alternative is grimmer for 
     us all. And we will prevail.

  We must also put these words into action. Positive action. We need to 
forge an agreement that renounces violence and terrorism, settles 
disputes through peace and negotiation, and acknowledges each peoples 
right to existence.
  As I stated before, I believe in an Israeli state and a Palestinian 
state. I believe in the rights of the Palestinian people and the people 
of Israel. Some may believe we are favoring a friend and slighting 
another, and some may not agree with the words of this resolution, but 
we should not let this hinder our objective of peace. We must keep an 
eye toward a different future and give peace another chance. There must 
be on immediate close fire.
  This resolution urges an unqualified opposition to all forms of 
terrorism and urges all parties in the region to pursue vigorously 
efforts to establish a just, and comprehensive peace in the Middle 
East.
  This is the kind of effort and mindset we need to accomplish our 
goal. We know the role we must play to get rid of the poisonous past, 
the trail of blood and tears and forge a path to peace filled with hope 
and opportunity.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Harman).
  Ms. Harman. Mr. Speaker, my father was a refugee from Nazi Germany. 
If he had not made his way here and not made his way in America, I 
would not be standing here.
  My story is the story of many Members, themselves refugees, like our 
friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), or the sons and 
daughters of refugees from oppressed places all over the world.
  The only country in the world which always, always provides a 
homeland for Jewish refugees is Israel. As anti-semitism is on the rise 
all over the world, shockingly in France and Germany, Israel's 
existence and security becomes even more important.
  President Harry Truman courageously recognized Israel 54 years ago 
and every administration since has strongly supported her. We must do 
so again today by strongly supporting this rule and this resolution. It 
is the moral thing to do. It is the strategic thing to do. It is the 
right thing to do.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Price.)
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, many of us will vote for H. 
Res. 392 because we do indeed wish to ``express solidarity with Israel 
in its fight against terrorism.'' We are repulsed by the suicide 
terrorist attacks perpetrated by some Palestinian groups and gravely 
concerned by Chairman Arafat's failure to prevent such attacks and his 
encouragement of a violent uprising. The Israeli people need to know 
that they can count on the United States at this time of peril.
  The resolution before us, however, falls far short of the kind of 
expression that might best contribute to stopping

[[Page H2067]]

the violence and moving toward a long-term settlement. The resolution 
appears designed to drive a ``wedge'' among friends of Israel for 
partisan purposes, and it risks misrepresenting the rationale behind 
the current efforts of President Bush and Secretary Powell to bring the 
parties together.
  A more adequate resolution would reiterate our support both for the 
security and integrity of Israel and for justice and self-determination 
for the Palestinians. It would back a vigorous, sustained American 
peacemaking role. It would affirm Israel's right of self-defense, while 
noting the obligation to distinguish between uprooting terrorism and 
destroying the institutions and infrastructure of Palestinian self-
government.
  I regret, Mr. Speaker, that H. Res. 392 falls so far short. But its 
ninth clause captures a sentiment which I believe all of us share, 
urging ``all parties in the region to pursue vigorously efforts to 
establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle 
East.''
  May we as a body and as a government find ways to tirelessly advance 
this goal in the critical days and weeks ahead.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  (Mr. DeFAZIO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the legislation. I had hoped to 
offer an alternative and speak and have not been allowed.
  Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my colleagues that Israel is the 
best friend of the United States in the Middle East. Israel is our most 
reliable ally in the Middle East. Israel is the only democracy in the 
Middle East. I consider myself a friend of Israel.
  However, the increasingly hard line stance being taken by the Israeli 
Government, and the current military offensive being conducted by Prime 
Minister Ariel Sharon, will do nothing to bring about lasting peace in 
the region.
  I am also concerned that the totally one-sided resolution being 
considered on the House floor today does nothing to enhance US. 
leadership in the region, and, in fact, could actually harm our ability 
to broker a permanent peace. I offered a truly balanced resolution, H. 
Res. 394, which would help send the message that the United States is 
committed to a negotiated settlement. Unfortunately, we are not being 
allowed to debate alternatives today.
  I have been to Israel. I have seen first-hand how this emotional and 
complicated dispute manifests itself in the daily lives of Israelis and 
Palestinians. Both sides consider the actions of the other as illegal 
under international law. Both sides also consider the lands under 
dispute to be their ancestral home. And, both sides claim religious 
sites, particularly in and around Jerusalem, as their own. This 
conflict has no military solution.
  Peace will never come to the region until all parties are committed 
to working toward the goal. I had thought that teenagers blowing up 
other teenagers with suicide bombs might shake up the respective 
parties enough to stop the violence and begin permanent settlement 
negotiations. That is clearly not the case at this point.
  Under no definition can Mr. Sharon on Mr. Arafat be considered men of 
peace. Neither can credibly claim the moral high ground.
  Mr. Arafat has utterly failed in his multiple commitments to crack 
down on militants. He failed to seize an opportunity offered by 
President Clinton to create a Palestinian state. His leadership has 
been connected to terrorist organization.
  But, prior to his election, Mr. Sharon intentionally visited a 
disputed holy site in Jerusalem in order to provoke a violent response. 
He has always been a vocal opponent of the Oslo Peace Process. He has 
advocated continued expansion of Jewish settlements in Palestinian 
territories. He ordered the Israeli military to reoccupy various 
Palestinian cities with weapons provided by United States taxpayers.
  What this conflict needs is mature leadership. I commend President 
Bush for his April 4, 2002, statement in which he gave voice to the 
legitimate grievances of both sides. I was also relieved when the 
President sent Secretary of State Colin Powell to the region.
  As President Bush noted in his April 4, 2002, speech, the parameters 
for a lasting resolution to this conflict are not really in dispute. 
What is lacking is the political will to reach a final settlement.
  As the President, the Mitchell Commission, Saudi Arabia and the Arab 
League, the European Union and others have noted in similar ways, peace 
could be achieved through Arab recognition of Israel's right to exist, 
guaranteeing Israeli security approximately within its 1967 borders, 
creation of a viable Palestinian state, halting Jewish settlements in 
Palestinian territories, and sincere negotiations to determine the 
final status of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees.
  Mr. Speaker, we are at a dangerous crossroads in the Middle East. 
Unfortunately, there is no Itzak Rabin with a vision for peace.
  Like all Americans, I unequivocally condemn acts of violence against 
both Israeli and Palestinian civilians.
  I urge all parties to recognize that continued military attacks and 
terrorist activities will only lead to persistent, escalating violence 
with the potential to destabilize the entire Middle East.
  I urge all parties to stop using state-controlled media or other 
means of propaganda to incite hatred and violence.
  The United States must maintain sustained, high-level diplomatic 
engagement. The United States must bring the Israelis and Palestinians 
back to the negotiating table. It has become obvious to all but Sharon 
and Arafat and their most ardent followers that there is no military 
solution to this conflict. Hundreds of reservists in the Israeli 
Defense Forces are refusing to serve in the Palestinian terrorists 
because they understand there is no military solution.
  I again commend the President and Secretary Powell for their efforts 
to mediate a peace and for their balanced view of the conflict.
  I intend to vote against the unbalanced resolution on the floor today 
because it does nothing to advance peace.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I do not seek to pursue an evenhanded 
resolution. Mr. Arafat by his conduct does not deserve it. But this 
resolution makes all of its requests of the Palestinians, and none of 
Israel. It says nothing about the obligation of both parties under 
Resolution 242. It says nothing about the needs of Israel in the 
context of a final settlement to withdraw from settlements. It says 
nothing about the willingness to support a Palestinian state in the 
context of a full settlement.
  It therefore, in my view, makes it harder for us to be seen as a 
fair-minded broker, and it makes it more difficult for the 
administration to persuade the Arab world to take the actions they must 
take to achieve peace; and that in the end hurts Israel, it does not 
help it.
  I am going to ask people to vote ``no'' on the previous question so I 
can offer an alternative, the text of H. Res. 405, which makes clear 
our support for Israel in a more constructive way.
  I fully support Israel's right to defend itself, but I do not support 
Mr. Sharon's efforts to hang onto the settlements and crush legitimate 
Palestinian nationalism.
  This gag rule on the House this afternoon does no credit to this 
body.
  Mr. Speaker, at this point in the Record I include the text of H. 
Res. 405 that I would offer if the previous question is defeated, as 
well as the text of a Washington Post editorial on the subject.

                              H. Res. 405

       Whereas recent events in the Middle East, triggered by 
     recent Palestinian suicide bombings, have created conditions 
     under which the reestablishment of a nonviolent environment 
     is highly unlikely without the active sustained leadership of 
     the United States: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) stands in solidarity with Israel's right as a frontline 
     state in the war against terrorism to take military action to 
     end terrorist attacks, to dismantle terrorist infrastructure, 
     and to provide security for its people;
       (2) remains committed to Israel's right to self-defense and 
     to assisting Israel in exercising that right;
       (3) will continue to assist Israel in strengthening its 
     homeland defenses;
       (4) condemns Palestinian suicide bombings and the ongoing 
     support and coordination of terror by Yassir Arafat and other 
     members of the Palestinian leadership;
       (5) insists that the Palestinian Authority fulfill its 
     commitment to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in the 
     Palestinian areas;
       (6) urges all Arab states, particularly United States 
     allies Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to declare their unqualified 
     opposition to all forms of terrorism, particularly suicide 
     bombing, and to act in concert with the United States to stop 
     the violence;
       (7) urges Israel to make clear, in the context of the full 
     settlement described in paragraph (8), its willingness to 
     withdraw from occupied territories; and
       (8) urges all parties in the region to vigorously pursue 
     efforts to establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace 
     in the Middle

[[Page H2068]]

     East that will enable Israel and an independent Palestinian 
     state to exist within the context of full and normal 
     relationships, which should include termination of all claims 
     or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment 
     of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political 
     independence of every state in the area and their right to 
     live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free 
     from threats or acts of force.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, Apr. 24, 2002]

                       Terrorism and Nationalism

       Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has insisted that his 
     army's offensive in the West Bank has been aimed at uprooting 
     the infrastructure of Palestinian terrorism, in the same way 
     that the United States has used military force to drive al 
     Qaeda from Afghanistan. That seems a worthy goal, and to some 
     a valid comparison--and yet it doesn't explain why Israeli 
     troops would have raided and deliberately destroyed the 
     civilian ministries of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah. 
     At the Ministry of Higher Education, the Israelis stripped 
     all the computers of their hard drives, then piled them 
     together and blew them up. They also destroyed Palestinian 
     television studios, knocked down radio antennas and looted 
     Palestinian banks. Perhaps some of these acts were carried 
     out by undisciplined troops. But the pattern of destruction 
     also suggests a crucial distinction between Israel's campaign 
     and that of the United States. Both invasions are aimed at 
     crushing terrorist organizations that have carried out savage 
     attacks on innocent civilians. But Israel also has another 
     target: the Palestinian national movement, which aims at 
     ending the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and 
     Gaza Strip and creating a Palestinian state in its place.
       The problem with equating Israel's campaign against 
     terrorism with that of the United States, as Mr. Sharon and 
     some of his American supporters do, is that it overlooks this 
     contest for territory and sovereignty underlying the Israeli-
     Palestinian bloodshed. Though it has been contaminated by 
     suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism, the Palestinian 
     national cause and its goals are recognized as legitimate by 
     the Bush administration and the United Nations, and they were 
     tacitly accepted by Israel when it signed the Oslo accords of 
     1993. Mr. Sharon and most of the rest of his government, 
     however, have never accepted Oslo; on the contrary, they have 
     devoted most of their lives to the dream of permanently 
     establishing Israel's control over most, if not all, of the 
     territories it occupied during the 1967 Six Day War. Few 
     outside of Israel support that plan, but Mr. Sharon and his 
     allies have for decades argued that Israeli occupation and 
     settlement of the Arab lands were necessary to control the 
     Palestinian threat to Israel.
       The disastrous decision of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat 
     not to accept a negotiated settlement of Palestinian claims 
     and his subsequent encouragement of a violent uprising 
     against the Israeli occupation have justified an Israeli 
     response. But they have also given Mr. Sharon and other 
     Israeli nationalists the cover to pursue their own 
     unacceptable ambitions. In the name of uprooting terrorism, 
     they have systematically destroyed the institutions and 
     infrastructure of Palestinian self-government. To back the 
     Israeli invasion, as the Bush administration has mostly done, 
     is not just to back the cause of counterterrorism, it is also 
     to abet Mr. Sharon's drive to suppress Palestinian national 
     rights.
       The Bush administration's uncompromising opposition to 
     terrorism following Sept. 11 is politically and morally 
     powerful and has yielded impressive results, both in 
     Afghanistan and in many other parts of the world. 
     Nevertheless, if counterterrorism is to remain an effective 
     cause, the administration must discriminate between terrorism 
     and the sometimes legitimate political causes it is used for; 
     and it must also differentiate between legitimate defense 
     against terrorism and attempts to use counterterrorism to 
     justify unacceptable aims. The Israeli writer Amos Oz has 
     observed that Israel is engaged in two separate campaigns 
     against the Palestinians--a legitimate war against terrorism 
     and an ``unjust and futile'' bid for control of the West Bank 
     and Gaza. The Bush administration needs a policy that can 
     tell the difference between the two.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, this has been an interesting debate today. I think it is 
very appropriate that this resolution is before us. It is a very 
important vote. Obviously, the vote on the previous question is a key 
vote.
  What the proponents of this resolution, of which I am a proud 
cosponsor, are saying is basically let others be neutral. We should 
never be wary of standing with Israel. We should never be wary of 
standing with our friends, even when we are alone. That is one of the 
distinguishing and most honorable characteristics of this great Nation.
  So with this vote today this Congress will be telling Israel that 
they can count on us; that Israel, our friend, can count on this 
Congress, can count on the United States of America. So I would urge 
all of my friends, all of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to 
support this resolution.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to House Resolution 404, 
Expressing Solidarity with Israel. While some measures of this 
resolution may be accurate, it only provides one side of the story.
  This resolution condemns the use of terrorism by Palestinians. I too, 
condemn these acts. This resolution also condemns Chairman Arafat for 
failing to take action to prevent terrorists from operating out of 
territory under his control. I also condemn this failure.
  However, this resolution fails to condemn the excessive use of force 
by the Israeli government, it fails to call on Israel to allow United 
Nations investigators to go to the Refugee camp in Jenin to investigate 
accusations of human rights violations, and it fails to call on both 
sides to go back to peace talks to resolve their differences.
  I am disappointed that the House Leadership brought this resolution 
to the floor instead of House Resolution 494, introduced by my friend 
Congressman DeFazio, of which I am an original cosponsor. H. Res. 494 
is a balanced resolution that condemns the violent acts of both parties 
in this conflict, calls on both sides to protect human rights observers 
and aid workers, and calls on both sides to comply with United Nations 
Security Council Resolutions.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution not because of what it 
says but for what it does not say.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, my vote in solidarity with the State of 
Israel should not be read as a vote in solidarity with policies of 
Ariel Sharon that I view as misguided and counterproductive. My support 
for Israel is longstanding, but Ariel Sharon is not ``Israel.'' He was 
wrong in rejecting the successful peace process in Osla, in rejecting 
President Clinton's efforts at Camp David in 2000, in rejecting the 
talks between Israelis and Palestinians at Taba, Egypt in January 2001, 
and he was wrong in Sabra and Shatila. Without approving in any way 
actions of some of his adversaries or condoning their violence, he is 
wrong in continuing to reject measured answers to the Middle East 
crisis.
  New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, hardly a Palestinian advocate, 
recently wrote: ``Many Israelis feel Mr. Sharon is so paralyzed by his 
obsession with eliminating Mr. Arafat, by his commitment to colonial 
settlements and by his fear that any Israeli concession now would be 
interpreted as victory for the other side that he can't produce what 
most Israelis want: a practical, non-ideological solution.''
  A ``non-ideological solution'' is what this land--so small in size, 
and so great in meaning--requires. It is the spirit embodied both in 
the courageous efforts of Secretary of State Colin Power and in our 
country's United Nations vote for Security Council Resolution 1397 
``affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and 
Palestine, live side-by-side within secure and recognized borders.''
  This is not the resolution that I would have drafted, but no 
amendments were permitted to it. This resolution fails to recognize the 
legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people to live in peace and 
security or to acknowledge that innocent Palestinians also lost lives 
and homes.
  As Secretary Powell has indicated, this particular resolution ``would 
be very unhelpful.'' It does not advance security for families 
threatened by violence, it may only lessen our ability to serve as an 
honest broker to secure a more lasting peace for all who suffer.
  The Administration's months of inattention, indecision, and 
unwillingness to engage in the Middle East made a bad situation worse. 
Mr. President, heed Secretary Powell and General Zinni's counsel. Lead 
our foreign policy yourself--do not cede this critical mission to Ariel 
Sharon and Tom DeLay.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, due to the start of the celebration of 
Greek Orthodox Easter and religious obligations in my district, I was 
unable to cast a vote on roll call 126. Had I been present, would have 
voted ``yea'' on H. Res. 392.
  I strongly support Israel's right to defend its citizens and applaud 
their quest for peace. Israel is exercising its right to act in self-
defense against the suicide bombings and other attacks on Jews. This is 
the time for the United States to stand with Israel, our ally for 
several decades, and to express our support for ending the violence in 
Israel.
  Israel must squash the terrorism within its borders in order to 
maintain its status as a free, democratic and civilized society. Our 
pledge to eradicate terrorism everywhere it occurs should be taken 
seriously, and Israel should be commended for having chosen to help us.
  Ms. DeGette. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express solidarity and 
sympathy with the people of Israel, but also with innocent Palestinians 
who have suffered violence and injury. I believe it is important for 
Congress to condemn in the strongest terms terrorism wherever it 
occurs. I also strongly believe that the

[[Page H2069]]

U.S. must not forget that the highest goal of our foreign policy in the 
Middle East should be forging a lasting peace agreement. The U.S. must 
work toward a lasting peace for the vast majority of Israeli and 
Palestinian people who are non-violent and only seek peace and 
stability.
  In its effort to help establish a concrete agreement for peace, the 
U.S. must first work aggressively through diplomatic channels with the 
Palestinians and the Israelis to help negotiate a cease-fire. All 
people in the Middle East deserve to live their lives in peace and 
security. Yet, only with a cease-fire and a reduction of fear and anger 
will there be any hope of future peace talks.
  The goal of a lasting peace agreement is why the resolution that 
Congress is considering today should not be defeated. If this 
resolution were to fail, the wrong message would be sent to the people 
of Israel. The U.S. Congress would be seen as turning its back on the 
people of the Middle East in this time of horrible violence. The 
resolution's failure would have a dampening effect on America's ability 
to successfully negotiate a cease-fire, and eventually a lasting peace 
agreement that will benefit all the people of the Middle East.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I support H. Res. 392 in its expression of 
American solidarity with the people of Israel, our closest and most 
reliable ally in the region. I also support its declaration of our 
country's long-standing commitment to ensuring Israel's right to exist 
and its right to security in the region, although this commitment has 
never been in question. Given those two points, I will vote in favor of 
this resolution.
  But at the same time, I am also deeply troubled by the timing of this 
resolution and the fact that it expresses no concern over the decades-
long plight of the Palestinian people and their struggle for 
independence and security. Additionally, this resolution condemns only 
the sins of one side of this conflict, despite the fact that both 
parties share responsibility for the massive escalation of violence in 
the region over the last 18 months. Nor does this resolution provide 
any encouragement for either party to return to the negotiating table 
to work out a fair and lasting peace. Because of that, my vote in favor 
of this resolution comes with extreme reluctance.
  I question the wisdom of the House Leadership for forcing a vote on 
this resolution at this time. This resolution has the potential to 
derail the current peace initiatives being offered by their own 
Republican Administration, initiatives that I and the vast majority of 
the American public support. It also has the potential of inflaming 
extremists on both sides to continue the violence, if the United States 
is perceived as a biased influence. This would be a disaster for both 
the Israeli and Palestinian people.
  The United States has many vital strategic, economic and political 
interests in the Middle East. These vital nations interests require 
that the United States reconcile its simultaneous commitments to 
ensuring the security of the State of Israel; to supporting Arab allies 
to achieve regional stability; and to containing the proliferation of 
non-conventional weapons.
  That is why a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians is an 
imperative and not merely an option for the United States. The U.S. 
goal of achieving regional stability, including security for Israel, is 
impossible without a comprehensive resolution of the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict. I hope this resolution does not impede us from 
reaching that goal.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, not 
because it is perfect, or even because it is as balanced as it could 
be. I support this resolution because it says something that needs to 
be said and can never be repeated enough. It states, once again, that 
terrorism cannot and will not be tolerated, no matter where it occurs. 
Mr. Speaker, the series of suicide attacks that have been perpetrated 
by Palestinian terrorist networks against the people of Israel are 
attacks against hope itself, and they must be condemned in the 
strongest possible terms.
  But Mr. Speaker, the efforts to rebuild hope has to begin with the 
realization that violence will never bring peace. Israel certainly has 
a right to defend itself, but it cannot assume that it will be able to 
beat the Palestinian people into submission. Palestinians need to have 
their dignity recognized, just like any of us. Unfortunately, Mr. 
Speaker, we often ignore the fact that many of the 1400-plus 
Palestinians killed in this violence were civilians who, like the rest 
of us, only want to build a home and family and live in peace with 
their neighbors. Let us be clear: we will not support the domination of 
one people by another. We do not believe that people should have to 
live in subjugation to their neighbors simply because of their place of 
birth, their religion, the language they speak, or their ethnicity. We 
affirm the rights of both Palestinians and Israelis to live side by 
side in a state of peace, and I, along with many of my colleagues have 
stated that principle over and over again.
  Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues, I cling to a hope that peace 
in the Middle East will one day become a reality. I have personally 
committed myself to the issue of middle East peace, trying to 
reinvigorate the hope that seems to have been lost during the past year 
and a half of violence. I will continue to be sincere in my efforts. I 
urge my colleagues to examine their own hearts on this issue, and move 
forward in a way that is constructive and helpful. Peace is possible, 
Mr. Speaker, but it will take a courageous effort from everyone to make 
it so.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I am compelled to vote 
``present'' on H. Res. 392 because I believe that consideration of this 
resolution is premature.
  Secretary of State Colin Powell is in the midst of delicate 
negotiations to bring about a cease-fire and return all parties to the 
negotiating table. I strongly support this mission to bring a lasting 
peace to the Middle East.
  I also firmly believe Israel's right to defend itself against 
terrorism and denounce the brutal Passover suicide bombing, which 
killed 28 people and injured nearly 150. However, the Administration's 
peace initiative must be given time to work.
  At this point, Congress should support the Secretary's peace mission 
and not pass a resolution that could undermine these efforts. As 
Americans, we all must work together to end the acrimonious 
relationship between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, during these delicate times of instability, I 
do not believe that this Congress should be voting on a resolution 
regarding the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian territories.
  I believe that this resolution we are debating today--H. Res. 392--
does not serve any great purpose but only serves to undermine the 
Administration's efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement to the 
conflict in the Middle East.
  Our overall mission should be a resolution to the fighting; debating 
this measure at this time does not accomplish that mission.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in unwavering support of House 
Resolution 392 to reaffirm strong relations between the United States 
and Israel.
  The U.S. has a unique relationship with Israel--the only democratic 
nation in the Middle East. We must continue to support nations with 
similar ideological goals and that share the same commitment to 
democratic principles. Our history of friendship spans many decades, 
and the U.S. has been one of the strongest advocates for efforts to 
craft a long-term peace settlement in the region. We cannot waiver from 
our commitment to stability in the area, and the U.S. should serve as a 
facilitator for peace negotiations.
  Recently Israel's people have suffered from unspeakable acts of 
cruelty. The United States, still healing from the attacks of September 
11, must stand by Israel in these difficult times. I strongly condemn 
the acts of radical Palestinian groups that use violence against 
civilians, a tactic that we cannot tolerate. In February, I called on 
the President to add the al-Aqsa Matryrs' Brigade, the Tanzim, and 
Force 17 to the international list of terrorist groups. These 
organizations are responsible for countless attacks on the Israeli 
people, and the United States must take action against them.
  I also call upon Chairman Arafat to curb these attacks, to denounce 
such acts of terror, and to reiterate his support for peace. Until the 
violence abates, I support Israel's right to take reasonable action to 
defend itself and its citizens from further harm.
  We must continue our efforts in Congress to promote peace in the 
Middle East and maintain a strong United States-Israel relationship. I 
urge all of my colleagues to vote for the resolution before us today.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 
392 and in support of efforts to bring lasting peace and security to 
the Middle East. The United States Congress today will, once again, 
reinforce its bond and our nation's bond with the people of Israel. I 
am proud to join my colleagues in sending this message of support for 
our close ally and friend, the State of Israel.
  A short time ago, as families and as a people, Jews retold the story 
of our Exodus from slavery in Egypt. And Jews everywhere vowed, ``Next 
year in Jerusalem,'' because Jerusalem belongs to all of us. We tell 
that story to remind ourselves and our children how we once were slaves 
and now we are free.
  A few weeks ago, we remembered the six million slaughtered in the 
Holocaust. We wept together and Jews everywhere vowed, ``Never again.'' 
We tell that story to remind ourselves and our children that even now, 
especially now, we cannot take our freedom for granted.
  A few days ago, we celebrated the 54th anniversary of the 
establishment of our beloved State of Israel, the tiny spot on this 
planet where Jews everywhere know that, no matter what, we can go there 
and be free.
  And today we gather here to make a commitment to freedom: that Israel 
will thrive and shine as a democratic, Zionist, Jewish homeland now and 
forever.

[[Page H2070]]

  The resolution before us today tells our brothers and sisters in 
Israel that we stand with them; that we will not stand idly by while 
they are murdered by terrorists during a Pesah seder, or waiting for a 
bus, or going to a restaurant, shopping at a mall, going to a cafe or 
sleeping in their beds. We will walk with them, and we're doing that 
today, every step of the way.
  Our message today to those who would desecrate our synagogues or 
attack our children in France or Belgium or the Ukraine or Canada or 
Los Angeles or Chicago: ``Never again'' will we allow your anti-
Semitism to threaten our lives and our freedom, and we will hold any 
government that tolerates anti-Semitism accountable for its actions or 
inaction.
  Last week at the AIPAC Conference in Washington, attended by hundreds 
of people from Illinois, you could also see in attendance, the largest 
gathering of members of the U.S. House and Senate anywhere outside of a 
joint session of Congress. Over half of the U.S. Senators were there; 
over one-fourth of the 435 members of the House. This is unprecedented. 
They were there because they stand firmly with us as friends of Israel.
  This outpouring of support did not happen by accident. It is a 
tribute to the Jewish community, to our organizations, all of the 
synagogues, institutions and individuals, and their decades of work 
that so many of my colleagues, even those from states with small Jewish 
populations, understand the importance of Israel and the U.S./Israel 
relationship. Because of that diligence, the day in, day out educating 
of policy makers, I know that the United States of America will always, 
ALWAYS, stand firmly with Israel. I will never allow that bond to be 
broken.
  Let me end by quoting some of the words spoken by Rabbi Michael 
Melchior, Israel's Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, at the 
incredible rally in Washington, D.C. two weeks ago. He referred to a 
Torah portion that describes the Biblical laws of holiness. ``The 
climax of these laws,'' he said, ``the peak of holiness is remarkable. 
It is the simple commandment--`Love your neighbor because he is as 
yourself.' This is Jewish holiness. We will never accept those who 
prevent this holiness, who subscribe to a doctrine of ``Kill your 
neighbor with yourself . . .' This fight seems overwhelming. A raging 
sea of violence ready to engulf us, and many of us have moments of 
despair. But our people, from its earliest days of creation have found 
ways of crossing such seas. I pray and truly believe that if we keep 
sight of the values for which we are fighting, we will cross this sea 
as well as reach the land of which we have so long dreamed, the land of 
peace.''
  I urge all members to support this resolution. With its passage we 
make clear the U.S. commitment to the people of Israel. We will stand 
with Israel forever and we will guarantee that the people of Israel are 
free to live in peace and security. Today more than ever we need to 
reinforce that commitment. Passage of this measure joins the United 
States with all friends and allies of the people of Israel in saying Am 
Yisrael Chai! The people of Israel will continue to live--now and 
forever.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 392.
  As Israel and its citizens undergo a daily bombardment from 
terrorists and sucicide bombers, we have an opportunity to stand in 
support of the only democracy in a desert of despotism. It is our 
responsibility to be the brokers for peace in the Middle East and 
ensure that two homelands exist--one for Israel and one for the 
Palestinians. But we cannot allow our pursuit of peace to ignore this 
rampage of Palestinian terror.
  One of the most important moments in our modern history with the 
Middle East occurred in 1981. Israel knew that Saddam Hussein's Iraq 
was developing the Osirak nuclear reactor--the future of their nuclear 
weapons program. Israel had the prescience to deny Saddam Hussein the 
capacity to set up a nuclear bomb factory in Iraq when it sent a dozen 
F-16 fighters over the Saudi Desert to destroy the Osirak nuclear 
reactor. Israel was flogged with criticism from the world community, 
including the United States in a United Nations resolution.
  Israel should have been commended, not reprimanded for taking out 
Osirak. This move set Saddam's Iraq's nuclear program back decades--the 
same Saddam who today will pay $25,000 to the family of each suicide 
bomber who kills innocent Israelis. Should we stand with Israel, when 
the rest of the world condemns it? Yes. Israel is our only Middle East, 
democratic ally against terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Vote yes 
on this resolution and stand in solidarity with Israel.
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, my ongoing medical treatment required my 
return to New Jersey today prior to the vote on H. Res. 392--Expressing 
solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``aye'' on this important measure.
  Today the House of Representatives stands in solidarity with the 
people of Israel. The United States knows no more valuable ally in the 
Middle East than the nation Israel. The goals of our two democracies 
are identical: peace and freedom.
  Today, our nation also stand for a just and lasting peace in the 
Middle East. We cannot wait idly while such violence continues in the 
Middle East. Mothers, fathers, and children have been slaughtered and 
terrorist attacks drive Israelis and Palestinians further and further 
apart. Peace cannot be negotiated in an atmosphere of terror.
  I support the recent peace mission undertaken by Secretary of State 
Colin Powell at the director of President Bush and I urge the Bush 
Administration to continue its active involvement in the peace process 
in the region. The President and his Administration should know that he 
has the support of Congress for his efforts in the Middle East and the 
war on terror.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise with sincere concerns about H. Res. 
392. We should not be bringing this type of one-sided resolution to the 
floor now. Instead, we should be working on a resolution that 
encourages peace.
  The United States does not need a political resolution to show that 
it is a friend of Israel. America has proven it is a friend of Israel, 
and I personally count myself as a long and loyal friend of Israel. But 
I am not pleased with the behavior of either side--Israel or the 
Palestinian Authority--right now.
  When friends allow a fight to continue that neither side can win, 
inaction only prolongs the violence and killing. We must not allow our 
aversion to inaction spur us to unhelpful resolutions that do not help 
our friends. I will vote ``Present'' on H. Res. 392 because this 
unbalanced resolution does not benefit our friends. Instead, it fans 
the flames of hatred.
  That is one of the reasons I am a cosponsor of Congressman DeFazio's 
resolution, H. Res. 394. That resolution is a balanced attempt to 
bridge the gap between the two sides in this conflict. The United 
States' approach must be evenhanded if we are to move the peace process 
forward. Languishing in a cycle of blame over the mistakes of both 
sides is counterproductive. We must recognize that all parties have 
made mistakes, and instead of re-hashing what they have done wrong, 
start thinking about what they can do better in the quest for peace.
  As in the DeFazio resolution, we must recognize that the first step 
toward peace is stopping the violence being perpetrated by all parties. 
Israel's recent incursions into Palestinian-controlled territories have 
caused extraordinary hardship for innocent Palestinians and exacerbated 
the crisis. Likewise, the Palestinian suicide bombing attacks against 
Israel cannot be justified and the Palestinian leadership must do more 
to prevent these murderous attacks.
  We absolutely must support Israel's right to exist and defend itself 
as a sovereign state, but do so while also recognizing the Palestinian 
right to self-determination. In order for the U.S. to be an honest 
broker, it is extraordinarily important that we retain the trust of 
both sides. Only then will we be able to advance the cause of peace.
  Peace will be achieved only when Israeli citizens are secure in their 
homes and shops, when the Arab nations recognize Israel's right to 
exist, and when the Palestinian people have a state of their own. 
Acknowledging that the conflict may not be resolved soon, no option 
should be eliminated, including the possibility that international 
observers help maintain peace in the region.
  With emotions running high on both sides, acting as an honest broker 
requires courage, leadership and risking the temporary anger of both 
sides. But we must, because America is the world's best hope for peace.
  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this 
resolution as one symbol of my solidarity with the nation of Israel as 
well as all those engaged in a momentous struggle against terrorism. 
Simply put, Israel has a right to defensible borders and a right to 
live in peace with its neighbors. Thus, the United States has a moral 
imperative to assist Israel in its defense.
  In its 54 years of existence, Israel has been fighting an ongoing war 
against terrorists who sought to destroy her. These terrorists do not 
understand human mercy and kill indiscriminately men, women and 
children in service of a political cause that is the destruction of the 
Jewish state.
  We were all heartened by President Clinton's attempt to create peace 
between Israelis and Palestinians beginning in 1993. But, unfortunately 
the Palestinians could not surrender their goal of eliminating Israel 
and pushing her citizens into the sea.
  Almost 10 years after the Oslo process began we are facing the 
nightmare scenario for Israel. Attacked by terrorists inside her 
borders and from surrounding countries Israel has found little peace.

[[Page H2071]]

  Much like our own war against terrorism, this effort pits a 
democratic society against a leader that uses murder as a regular type 
of statecraft. This resolution is important for the message that it 
sends to our embattled ally Israel, to her citizens, and to all our 
democratic friends around the world.
  America stands by fellow democracies who share our values and our way 
of life. And, strong U.S. leadership is the best hope for bringing 
about a political process that can eventually pave the way for security 
and peace.
  Knowing that we must do something to stop the violence, I call out to 
all peace-loving people throughout the region, especially those in Arab 
countries, who seek a better life for their children and grandchildren, 
a vibrant economy, and meaningful commerce and exchange, to join us in 
our quest for peace.
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution is important because the message it 
sends will ring throughout the world wherever democracies are fighting 
terrorists and I urge its immediate passage.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, while I agree with the sentiments 
expressed by many of my House colleagues about the need for Israel to 
defend itself, I do not think that this is the right time for Congress 
to take sides in the Israel-Palestine affair. In foreign affairs 
America should speak with one voice. The president has said that this 
resolution only complicates an already complicated situation in the 
Middle East. Instead of having a separate congressional message, I 
believe we should be giving the President greater leeway to act as an 
honest broker between the Israelis and Palestinians and formulate a 
policy that will stop the violence and get negotiations going forward.
  On April 10, I met with former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin 
Netanyahu to discuss the current fighting in the Middle East. He 
stressed the difficulty of negotiating with the Palestinians, and 
warned that if the suicide bombings in Israel do not stop, then they 
may spread to the United States with `suitcase bombs.' But the U.S., as 
a military superpower and an economic superpower as well, can exert 
considerable pressure on both sides to encourage a resolution.
  Secretary of State Colin Powell confronted an almost intractable set 
of problems on his peace mission to the Middle East. The Israeli 
government continues to occupy parts of the Palestinian Authority's 
territory despite requests to desist and withdraw from President Bush. 
Too many governments in the region, including Yasser Arafat's 
Palestinian Authority, are ambiguous at best on their commitment to end 
terror. Although some Arab states have helpfully indicated their 
willingness to accept Israel, too many still confuse murder with 
martyrdom.
  When the United Nations mandated the creation of Israel and Palestine 
out of British-controlled territory in 1947, it offered to partition 
the land between a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab-controlled 
Palestine. That offer was rejected then, and though Israel was limited 
to the area of the proposed partition, a coalition of Arab states 
including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan immediately 
attacked. Israel prevailed in that war, however, as it did in the 
subsequent wars of 1967 and 1972. Although Egypt and Jordan have signed 
peace treaties with Israel, the other Arab countries maintain a state 
of ``cold'' war with Israel.
  The situation is further confused by land Israel captured in various 
conflicts, primarily the 1967 war. In that fight, Israel captured the 
West Bank and Gaza, including Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority now 
occupies the bulk of that territory as a result of the Oslo peace 
process. Israel offered nearly all of that territory two years ago for 
the creation of a Palestinian state. That offer was rejected, sparking 
the present conflict.
  The current cycle of violence in the region must not continue. The 
killing and bloodshed on both sides is blocking a resolution to the 
conflict and an end to our war on terrorism. Most everyone from 
Palestine and Israel has had a friend or relative injured or killed by 
the other side. The hatred that exists on both sides will not be easily 
overcome. For its part, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab world 
should take strong action to curb the mindless violence of suicide 
bombers. A Palestinian state should be established and the Arab world 
should accept the suggestion of Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz of 
Saudi Arabia to recognize Israel. At the same time, Israel must 
withdraw from Palestinian Authority territory as the President has 
requested. Accomplishing these acts, however, will not reduce the 
hatred. I see a need to build some physical separation between the two 
states until the animosity can subside.
  The President is demonstrating bold leadership and wants results. An 
anxious world also wants results, especially the suffering innocents in 
Israel and Palestine.
  We need to speak with one voice and that is why I am voting no on 
this resolution.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House 
Resolution 392, expressing our nation's solidarity with Israel in our 
joint battle against terrorism throughout the Middle East and the 
world.
  Unfortunately, because of a family medical emergency I was unable to 
cast a vote for the rule to consider this resolution and for the 
resolution itself. My vote earlier today though, for the previous 
question, to allow for the consideration of this legislation is 
indicative of my strong support for the House's expression of unity 
with Israel and the Israeli people.
  The American and Israeli people continue to be the primary targets of 
cowardly terrorist cells and I stand with the people of Israel in 
ensuring their right to defend their homeland and their citizens from 
these attacks. This resolution today is one more signal to the world 
that our two great nations are allied in the effort to bring about 
peace and rid the world of terrorists. We must never waiver in that 
fight if we are to succeed and I pledge my continuing support.
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 392, 
legislation expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight against 
terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, in the wake of the September 11th attacks, Americans 
have come to understand the struggle for security from the threat of 
domestic terror that so consumes the Israeli government and its people. 
This resolution comes at a crucial time in the history of both our 
nations. Israel, having just observed its 54th anniversary, continues 
the fight for its very survival while the U.S., engaged in its own 
full-scale war on terrorism, seeks to secure its own borders. H. Res. 
392 recognizes our common struggle with Israel against terrorism, the 
enormous human toll the people of Israel have suffered, and the efforts 
of Israel's government to thwart future attacks by Palestinian 
organizations determined to inflict the most possible damage on the 
people of Israel. The message from this body is one of unity and is 
meant to reverberate in every corner of the world, especially those 
that harbor the enemies of peace and democracy.
  H. Res. 392 expresses our strongly-held belief that Israel has a 
right to defend itself, just as we have sought to do. Mr. Speaker, 
throughout Israel's existence--one constant has guided every 
administration--the desire to live in peace with its neighbors. The 
1993 OSLO Accord set forth a path for peace. I must reiterate this 
point--since that time Israel has consistently expressed the 
willingness to give up sovereign land to live in peace with its 
Palestinian neighbors. The same cannot be said for Israel's would-be 
peace partner--Yassir Arafat. The violence of current intifada was 
triggered by President Arafat's rejection of Prime Minister Ehud 
Barak's offer of a comprehensive settlement at Camp David in 2000. 
Arafat continues to incite terror with statements like ``Oh god, give 
me a martyrdom like this'' which he said after the Passover suicide 
bombing that killed 27 and wounded hundreds of innocent Israelis.
  Mr. Speaker, civilian casualties are the horror endured by both sides 
but we must not lose sight of the fact that all of this death and 
destruction was completely avoidable. At every turn the Palestinian 
Authority could have chosen peace but, time and again, have supported 
terror as a mode of achieving their political goals. Mr. Speaker, as we 
express our solidarity with the government and people of Israel, I come 
back to one fundamental truth, even as the very existence of the State 
of Israel is threatened, there is always a path to peace. It may be 
more difficult to see, and harder still to traverse, but it exists. If 
falls upon us to help the parties find and travel that road. In the 
meantime, let the world hear this strong proclamation of support for 
our good friend Israel during these difficult times.
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today we should be here to focus on what 
all sides involved in the Middle East have in common and what can be 
applied from our experience here in this country to achieving solutions 
to the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis. We should 
not be here to blame one side over the other, but to seek solutions 
leading to the peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians.
  The struggle between the Israelis and the Palestinians is one of the 
most enduring and explosive of all the world's conflicts.
  For the Jewish people of Israel, the return to the land of their 
forefathers after centuries of persecution around the world has not 
brought peace or security. Israel has faced and continues to face 
crisis after crisis.
  Palestinians argue that over the last 54 years they have seen 
colonization, expulsion and military occupation in their difficult 
struggle for self-determination in a land they see as their God given 
land.
  This resolution is not balanced. At this time the Secretary of State 
and the Administration are working to bring peace to the Middle East. 
This resolution does not help this cause. This resolution damages our 
nation's moral authority and credibility as a fair broker in the Middle 
East conflict. I cannot support the resolution in its present form.

[[Page H2072]]

  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, while our country continues to be a staunch 
ally and long-time friend to Israel, this resolution does nothing to 
bring about a ceasefire that might lead to a lasting peace. Our role 
should be drawn these bitter enemies closer together, not drive them 
further apart, as this resolution does.
  The legislation, far more than a simple expression of support for 
Israel, also contains a long list of rhetorical ``findings'' which 
undermine any attempts to move the parties toward a comprehensive peace 
agreement. It will do little but further enflame the conflict in the 
Middle East.
  The measure before the House today comes on the heels of weeks of 
work by the Bush Administration to reduce tension in the region, and 
bring about an end to the suicide bombings and Israeli incursion into 
Palestinian towns. The resolution would likely complicate the 
President's efforts since it provides a one-sided view of the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict that likely would only cause anger and distrust 
for the U.S. among the Palestinian people and erode the hard-won 
progress the Administration has already made.
  I and other Members have expressed a preference for a more balanced 
statement that would express support for Israel, but additionally 
advance the cause of peace. Press reports and a Member on the floor 
during debate today has stated that officials with the U.S. agency 
responsible for the peace process efforts, the State Department, also 
indicated their preference for a less one-sided bill.
  Senator Joseph Lieberman and Congressman David Obey both had prepared 
resolutions of support that were much more balanced that I would have 
strongly supported had I had the opportunity to do so. Both of those 
resolutions still condemn suicide bombings, support the right of Israel 
to defend itself and call on the Palestinians and other Arab states to 
work to end terrorism. Congressman Obey's resolution also urges Israel 
to make it clear when it will withdraw from Palestinian territories.
  Additionally, included in the measure before the House today is a 
statement supporting increased foreign aid to Israel. With budget 
deficits projected over the next several years, we won't even have the 
necessary resources to strengthen homeland security, improve Medicare 
benefits, safeguard Social Security, develop a comprehensive drug plan 
for senior citizens and provide a high quality education for America's 
youth.
  We must do all we can to support the President's efforts to bring 
about peace in this region. I certainly do not want to undermine what 
progress he has already made. While I have consistently been a 
supporter of the State of Israel, regrettably, today I must vote `no,' 
on this resolution. It is always difficult to say ``no'' to friends, 
but we must when it's appropriate. And it is appropriate here because 
this action does not advance the long-term cause of peace in the 
region.
  Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 392, a 
Resolution to express solidarity with Israel in its fight against 
terrorism. Now more than ever, Americans can sympathize and find common 
cause with the plight of the Israeli people as they struggle against 
terrorism. And now more then ever, Israel needs our solidarity and 
support.
  It is, and has always been, in both the moral and strategic interests 
of the United States to stand by its only true friend and ally in the 
region. Israel is a lone democracy in a region that knows too little 
political freedom. It is one of the few countries in that volatile part 
of the world that does not support terrorist organizations. Like 
America, Israel is a society governed by law. Like ours, the Israeli 
press questions the actions of its government and allows for a 
pluralism of ideas. And like ours, Israel's society is under attack by 
those that seek its destruction and are willing to use the most 
inhumane form of terrorism--turning young men and women into human 
bombs--to achieve their ends.
  Like all concerned Americans, I hope for a peaceful, negotiated 
solution to the crisis in the Middle East, and I condemn intentional 
acts of violence against all civilians, both Israeli and Palestinian. 
When a Palestinian leader emerges who will renounce terrorism 
unequivocally and seek peace, all parties in the region will have an 
obligation to embrace the opportunity. Until then, Israel has the right 
to defend itself from those who will never accept its very existence. 
That's why it is so critical that we here in America never waver in our 
resolve to stand by the State of Israel.
  Israel faces the unfortunate reality of being a beachhead in the 
global war against terrorism. But more than this, Israel is a friend 
and ally. If terror is allowed to succeed in Israel, by forcing 
political concessions with vicious suicide attacks, it will only 
embolden those who seek to destroy the U.S., and indeed all 
civilization, with similar tactics. Israel is fighting for its survival 
against the forces of terror. Terror must not be allowed to win.
  The Israeli people will continue their struggle for peace and 
security. They should do so knowing they have the full support of the 
United States of America. Good diplomacy is based on sound values. 
American values stand firmly with the State of Israel.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the resolution.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote for this resolution, 
because I want to leave no doubt whatsoever about the depth of my 
support for the people of Israel. I grieve with them at the losses they 
have sustained, and stand in solidarity with them in their hour of 
peril. At the same time, I want to express my disappointment that the 
resolution fails to express concern for the loss of life on both sides 
of this conflict. Our hearts should go out to all innocent victims and 
their families, whether they be Israeli or Palestinian.
  I am also concerned that this resolution may complicate the efforts 
of the President to bring the parties together. America is the only 
power on earth that has the means and the will to move the parties 
toward a comprehensive peace that each can accept. The President and 
Secretary Powell have committed themselves to this effort. And we 
should do nothing in this chamber that might make it more difficult for 
the Administration to exercise its leverage with both sides to bring 
about this result.
  Finally, the resolution says nothing about what is required to 
achieve a ``just, comprehensive and lasting peace''. In my view, it 
requires mutual recognition of an independent, viable Palestinian state 
and an Israel that exists within secure and defensible borders. It 
requires that each side recognize the legitimate aspirations of the 
other--and put an end to the cycle of provocation and retaliation that 
has brought so much misery to them both.
  While only the parties themselves can set the terms for peace, this 
much is evident. On the Palestinian side there must be an end to 
terrorist violence and the financial and material support the 
terrorists receive from Arab states. On the Israeli side, there must be 
an end to the building of settlements, the bulldozing of neighborhoods, 
and other provocative acts that have driven the Palestinians to 
despair.
  Decades of conflict have taken a devastating toll on both 
communities, creating conditions in which the Israelis suffer 
unimaginable losses and the Palestinians have nothing left to lose. 
What seems tragically clear is that the violence will continue until 
both sides recognize that they have more to gain from peace than from 
continuing their armed struggle. This will take more than resolutions. 
It will take genuine resolve. The kind of resolve that was so movingly 
expressed by the late Prime Minister of Israel, Yitzhak Rabin, in his 
final speech before his tragic assassination on November 4, 1995:

       I was a military man for 27 years. I fought as long as 
     there was no chance for peace. I believe that there is now a 
     chance for peace, a great chance. We must take advantage of 
     it for the sake of those standing here, and for those who are 
     not here--and they are many.
       I have always believed that the majority of the people want 
     peace and are ready to take risks for peace. In coming here 
     today, you demonstrate, together with many others who did not 
     come, that the people truly desire peace and oppose violence 
     . . . This is a course which is fraught with difficulties and 
     pain. For Israel, there is no path that is without pain. But 
     the path of peace is preferable to the path of war.

  Israelis and Palestinians have experienced much pain since Rabin 
offered those final words to his people. But the risks he believed 
worth taking are still the only viable option. Only by following the 
path he laid out can Israel and America keep faith with him and all who 
have given their lives for the sake of peace.
  Ms. RIVERS. Mr. Speaker, my vote today on H. Res. 392 is not a vote 
in favor of the Israelis or the Palestinians. Nor is it a vote against 
them. It is a vote for peace. I am convinced that an enduring 
settlement on the long-standing differences between Israel and 
Palestine cannot be achieved through military means--only through 
negotiations and compromise. The ongoing violence has caused pain and 
grief beyond measure for both peoples and there is blame and sympathy 
enough to go around.
  The United States can play an important--and irreplaceable--role as 
an honest broker and a friend to all. Israel has been a good friend and 
ally to the U.S. I support her right to exist and her right to defend 
herself. The United States has always had a special relationship with 
her and I remain committed to that relationship. However, I am also 
steadfast in my desire to see a two-state peace in the Middle East and 
I do not believe such a peace is possible without fair, thoughtful 
leadership by the United States.
  For some time now, constituents on both sides of this issue have 
demanded the same thing--that the U.S. condemn the other side, cut off 
all funding and diplomatic relations, and marginalize its leader. This 
does not strike me as wise. Former Senator and peace negotiator George 
Mitchell was very candid with me in a recent conversation about this. 
He believes

[[Page H2073]]

that we must maintain all manner of influence with both parties and our 
financial involvement in the region is part of that. I agree. At this 
point, we should not sever relations with either party or jeopardize 
future negotiations by being heavy-handed or unfair to either side.
  I am uncomfortable with the tone of this resolution. While it is 
understandable that the House may wish to express grave concerns about 
the violence currently taking place in the region, those concerns must 
be expressed in a way that does not cause either party to doubt the 
United States ``bona fides'' as a peacemaker nor its commitments to 
achieving outcomes acceptable to both parties. George Mitchell has been 
very clear that cease-fire and long term peace will require delicate 
negotiation of many small steps that will have to be taken--a few at a 
time--by both parties simultaneously. This resolution does not enhance 
the probability of such an agreement.
  Over the time I've been in Congress, the House has acted several 
times on resolutions such as this. I have tried to respond thoughtfully 
and fairly. However, there have been times when I have been concerned 
about the House's persistent efforts to intrude into the peace process 
from a distance. In those instances, I have abstained. Diplomacy is a 
delicate endeavor. There is little room for bias or partisan politics. 
For House Members to act unilaterally while negotiations are being 
sought or are ongoing would seem to jeopardize efforts to get both 
sides to compromise toward an agreement. For the Congress to so clearly 
take one party's side would seem to undermine, rather than further, our 
hopes for peace. A resolution such as this seems contrary to the 
outcome we all profess to desire.
  Accordingly, I cast my vote as ``present.''
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the 
sentiments of this resolution, but not the timing. Though a well-
intentioned document reinforcing the strong friendship between our 
nation and Israel, this resolution comes before us at an extremely 
sensitive moment in the Administration's attempts to stop the terrorist 
violence that has plagued Israel over the last 18 months.
  Ever since the 2000 Camp David meetings, where Yasser Arafat rejected 
former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak's offer of 98 percent of what 
Arafat had demanded from Israel, the tensions in the Middle East have 
escalated. When Arafat left those meetings without a deal, the 
extremist faction who oppose peace, and, in fact, oppose the existence 
of Israel itself, got the green light to destabilize the region.
  Despite Yasser Arafat's assertion that he opposes terrorism and is a 
so-called ``man of peace,'' his very own al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade has 
been identified by this government as a ``Foreign Terrorist 
Organization.'' This Brigade has been responsible for the deaths of too 
many innocent Israeli citizens. Earlier this year, the Karine-A was 
stopped en route to Arafat's Palestinian Authority carrying 50 tons of 
offensive weapons from Iran. Clearly, Arafat does not have peace in 
mind, nor does he view Israel as a neighbor.
  Since September 2000, hundreds of innocent people in Israel have been 
killed by terrorists, sometimes financed and supported by the 
Palestinian Authority. We have learned that the Palestinian Authority 
and Saddam Hussein's Iraq are financially rewarding the families of 
those who willingly sacrifice their lives to murder innocent people and 
stop the peace process. We have heard some threaten to use oil as a 
weapon against the United States unless we stop Israel from defending 
herself. Mr. Speaker, terrorist actions in our country or Israel or any 
country should be viewed as an act of war. More importantly, any 
country threatened by terrorists actions should be able to defend 
itself. We assert that right, and we should not set a different 
standard for our allies.
  All of that being said, I am concerned about what message we send, as 
a Congress, at this particular time. The President is moving forward 
with delicate negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Just 
yesterday, a breakthrough in negotiations yielded the release of Yasser 
Arafat from his headquarters in Ramallah. This came as a result of both 
sides trusting our government as a third party negotiator.
  At this critical point, we should follow the lead of the Bush 
Administration, and maintain the trust established on both sides. There 
are many people in this country who have a kinship with Israel, a 
trusted ally and the only democracy in the Middle East, and want to see 
Israel reach peace with its neighbors, after more than 50 years of 
bloodshed. However, that mission becomes much harder if we are no 
longer honest brokers, who can be trusted by both sides. When the trust 
is broken, the Palestinians will look for others to help them, perhaps 
countries like Iraq or Iran, who will use armies, not diplomats to try 
and end this conflict.
  This Congress will have its chance to make clear its feelings on 
Israel and her right of self-defense and, ultimately, deal with Mr. 
Arafat. However, that time should not be now. I will be voting 
`present' and stand with the President. There is a time for this vote, 
it is just not this day.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this 
resolution, but I'd also like to take this opportunity to clarify my 
support.
  I support the resolution's call for our continued solidarity with 
Israel and for the condemnation of terrorism everywhere and of 
Palestinian suicide bombings, in particular. I support the resolution's 
call for the Palestinian Authority to clamp down on terrorism in its 
territories and for Arab States to declare their opposition to 
terrorism. I support the resolution's call for the international 
community to help alleviate the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian 
people. Most importantly, I support the resolution's urging that all 
parties in the region pursue efforts to establish a just, lasting, and 
comprehensive peace. However, I wonder what has prompted the leadership 
to schedule this resolution for consideration at this moment.
  I do not think anyone has any doubt about our country's continuing 
support for the people of Israel. That has been a fundamental part of 
American foreign policy for decades, and remains so today. I do not 
think anyone, at home or abroad, has any doubt about it--so, as far as 
I can see, this resolution is not needed to remove any doubt. Further, 
I am concerned that the timing of this resolution could make the 
Administration's efforts to resolve the current crisis more difficult. 
I believe the Administration must continue to work with the Saudis and 
other moderate Arab states to get the parties to agree to move forward 
with the Mitchell and Tenet plans, and down the line, to restart 
negotiations.
  In addition, I believe that Congress should consider additional 
assistance for Israel, but that it should also consider emergency 
humanitarian assistance--provided through NGOs--for Palestinian 
civilians, whose misery grows and feeds extremism in the region. I 
believe that Israel must heed President Bush's call to end its recent 
incursions into West Bank cities and that it must end settlement 
expansion, recognizing that these actions diminish the possibilities of 
what this resolution calls for--a ``just, lasting, and comprehensive 
peace.''
  I believe that with crisis comes opportunity. There is now a window 
of opportunity to move away from the potential for a regional 
conflagration. Only the U.S. has been accepted by both parties as one 
that can lead them to peace. Now is not the time to take any action 
that might reduce our leverage with the Palestinian or with our Middle 
East allies. At this critical time, Congress should not only be 
signaling its strong support for Israel and signaling its rejection of 
violence, but it should also be trying to help--not hinder--the 
Administration as it works to get the parties back to the table.
  International Relations Committee Chair Henry Hyde said it best: ``I 
would have preferred a more balanced resolution, because I think we 
have to get beyond finger-pointing and ask ourselves, will this action 
help move us toward a cease-fire and a comprehensive peace agreement?'' 
I'm not sure that the answer is yes.
  Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today not to assess blame--because 
there is too much of it to go around. Nor to offer unqualified support 
to either side in this conflict--because blind support only deepens the 
tragic spiral of violence.
  I am here today to say once and for all, violence is wrong. Killing 
in the name of religion only defames it; and forcing the submission 
from an entire people only spawns hatred, contempt, hopelessness, and 
more violence.
  We are here today to give support to Israel, and they do deserve our 
support. Israel, like all nations, has a responsibility to ensure the 
safety of its citizens. Just as our nation needs to protect itself from 
terror, so must Israel.
  This resolution allows this great institution to emote; it is full of 
emotion, righteous indignation, and colorful language. But as elected 
officials of the greatest nation in the history of the world we must do 
more. Emotion is cathartic, but wisdom and pragmatism offer much more.
  This resolution was written under the justified anger that follows 
the terrorist's carnage. And in its emotion we have lost wisdom. We 
have made no mention of the 1,500 Palestinian civilians who have lost 
their lives in the recent conflict. Surely, the United States of 
America and its Congress consider the health of an innocent child to be 
equally tragic--whether she is Israeli or Palestinian, Jewish, 
Christian, or Muslim.
  Instead of sentiment we should be offering constructive ways to bring 
about a viable political solution to the current crisis. Remember, when 
the United States was fully engaged, when the Central Intelligence 
Agency was forcing the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel to 
work together both peoples enjoyed three of the most peaceful years of 
their history.
  I applaud the increasing engagement of this Administration in finding 
a political settlement.

[[Page H2074]]

As a Congress we need to speak as one voice in our support for 
Secretary of State Powell. The task before him is immense, but it is 
necessary. If we do not counter the escalating violence with diplomacy 
we lose the moral legitimacy of our leadership.
  The best way to secure the continued existence of the State of Israel 
is to simultaneously give hope and voice to the aspirations of the 
Palestinian people. A safe, secure, economically prosperous, and truly 
democratic Palestinian state is the only way to attain this peace.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for this resolution, and commend Majority Leader Tom DeLay and 
Representative Tom Lantos for their work. Israel should know that this 
House, this President, and the American people support her while she 
wages a war against terrorists who would mercilessly kill her citizens. 
Israel is fighting for nothing less than her right to exist, and today 
we express our solidarity with them in that fight.
  I believe that Prime Minister Sharon, along with his united 
government and the Israeli Defense Forces, is taking the steps 
necessary to weed out the nest of terrorists that have attacked their 
citizens for so long. Suicide bombers have no place among people who 
wish to join the community of nations. Leaders who tolerate their 
existence should have no welcome and no seat at the table with world 
leaders. Real peace can only be achieved when the brutality of those 
who murder innocent men, women and children is halted completely.
  I encourage all Members to support this resolution, Israel, the 
President, and all others including the courageous men and women of our 
own Armed Forces who are together waging the global war against 
terrorism.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of 
H. Res. 392, a resolution expressing solidarity with Israel in its 
fight against terrorism that was introduced by Congressman Tom DeLay, 
the distinguished Majority Whip from Texas. Unfortunately, due to a 
family illness, I was unable to be present when the House voted on H. 
Res. 392, however, had I been here, I would have voted ``Aye.''
  Is it important for the House of Representatives to support H. Res. 
392? You bet it is and let me tell why I believe so. The atrocities 
committed daily in the Middle East make us all sick and there's not a 
member in this body that doesn't want to see an end to it. We are 
confronted daily with scenes of carnage and destruction. Can we 
understand such violence? Yes we can. The facts, all too often 
forgotten, reveal the truth as to why peace has elluded the Middle 
East.
  Today, Israel is the only democracy in the region. Israel is smaller 
than the state of New Hampshire and is surrounded by nations hostile to 
its existence. When the United Nations proposed the establishment of 
two states in the region--one Jewish, one Arab, the Jews accepted the 
proposal and declared their independence in 1948. The Arab states 
rejected the UN plan. In 1948, five Arab armies invaded Israel. Again, 
in 1967, Arab armies amassed on Israel's borders with the clear 
intention to invade the state. Rather than suffer a bloody ambush, 
Israel rightfully took the necessary steps to defend its citizens and 
homeland, a right obliged to every Nation. It was during the Six Day 
War of 1967 that the West Bank and Gaza came under Israeli control.
  Israel has returned most of the land it captured during the 1967 war, 
and right after the war offered to return all of it in exchange for 
peace and normal relations. Unfortunately, the offer was rejected--
another missed opportunity for peace in the Middle East. As a result of 
the 1978 Camp David accords--in which Egypt recognized the right of 
Israel to exist and normal relations were established between the two 
countries--Israel returned the Sinai desert, a territory three times 
the size of Israel and 91 percent of the territory Israel took control 
of in the 1967 war.
  Israel has conceded that the Palestinians have legitimate claims to 
the disputed territories and is willing to engage in negotiations on 
the matter, and in return they only ask that they be allowed to live in 
peace. Seventy-three percent of Israelis agree to a Palestinian state 
that will live peacefully alongside Israel.
  In 2000, a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza was offered to 
the Palestinians at Camp David, by Israel and the U.S., in return for 
peace. The U.S. said yes, Europe said yes, the U.N. said yes, and the 
Arab countries said yes. Why didn't it happen? Arafat said No. Chairman 
Arafat and the other Palestinian leaders said no because they demand a 
Palestinian state in place of Israel, not alongside of it.
  Instead, the Palestinian Authority sanctioned an intifada, which the 
world is witnessing today. This has included twenty months of terror, 
shooting, and the bombing of innocent civilians.
  Simply describing the situation as a ``cycle of violence,'' although 
it may be accurate, ignores the distinctions in tactics and motivations 
of the two sides. Palestinian militants kill Israeli civilians, using 
bombs detonated by teenage suicide bombers who are promised wealth and 
pleasure for their martyrdom. Israeli troops kill Palestinians in self-
defense of their lives and that of their countrymen.
  The list of disturbing facts about Palestinian terror is long. 
Israeli troops recently discovered large quantities of counterfeit 
Israeli currency in the basement of Chairman Arafat's Ramallah 
headquarters, along with the printing machines that made it. They also 
found an invoice for $8,500 to cover bombing supplies in the office of 
Arafat's chief financial officer--it was on the letterhead of the Al 
Aqsa Martyrs Bridgade, an offshoot of Arafat's Fatah Party. The invoice 
specifically requested $150 to build each bomb, saying the group would 
need five to nine bombs per week.
  The Al Aqsa Brigades, which are forces directly under Chairman 
Arafat's control, have been designated as a Foreign Terrorist 
Organization by our government. Indeed, Yasser Arafat wears the map of 
the entire area of Israel on his uniform.
  Mr. Speaker, the national Palestinian goal is Jihad. All Palestinian 
organizations--political, military, cultural and commercial, along with 
the whole Palestinian school system, advocate the annihilation of 
Israel and educate generations of school-age children to become 
terrorists.
  Furthermore, Palestinians who have voiced an objection to the 
practice of blowing up innocent Israeli civilians are labeled traitors.
  In July 2001, these are the words of Chairman Yasser Arafat himself 
addressing his people at a public event, ``Kill a settler every day. 
Shoot at settlers everywhere. Do not pay attention to what I say to the 
media, the television or public appearances. Pay attention only to the 
written instructions that you receive from me.''
  The Palestinian terror attacks are not spontaneous acts of 
desperation. They are the product of a deliberate, well-planned, state-
sponsored education and incitement program. Its product is to turn a 
whole people into a nation of terrorists. Since the Oslo Accords in 
1993, when the Palestinian Authority gained control over 98% of the 
Palestinian population, it has been hard at work building this kind of 
terror system.
  A fair and balanced portrayal of the current Middle East situation 
reveals that one nation stands head and shoulders above the other in 
its commitment to human right and democracy, as well as in its 
commitment to peace and mutual security. Mr. Speaker, that nation is 
Israel. That's why H. Res. 392 is so important. I, for one, don't want 
the greatest nation on earth, the United States, to weaken our resolve 
in the all-important fight against terrorism. Nor should we ask it of 
our only true friend and ally in the Middle East region, and that is 
clearly Israel.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, this legislation could not have come at a 
worse time in the ongoing Middle East crisis. Just when we have seen 
some positive signs that the two sides may return to negotiations 
toward a peaceful settlement, Congress has jumped into the fray on one 
side of the conflict. I do not believe that this body wishes to de-rail 
the slight progress that seems to have come from the Administration's 
more even-handed approach over the past several days. So why is it that 
we are here today ready to pass legislation that clearly and openly 
favors one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
  There are many troubling aspects to this legislation. The legislation 
says that ``the number of Israelis killed during that time [since 
September 2000] by suicide terrorist attacks alone, on a basis 
proportional to the United States population, is approximately 9,000, 
three times the number killed in the terrorist attacks on New York and 
Washington on September 11, 2001.'' This kind of numbers game with the 
innocent dead strikes me as terribly disrespectful and completely 
unhelpful.
  It is, when speaking of the dead, the one-sidedness of this bill that 
is so unfortunate. How is it that the side that loses seven people to 
every one on the other side is portrayed as the sole aggressor and 
condemned as terrorist? This is only made worse by the fact that 
Palestinian deaths are seen in the Arab world as being American-
inspired, as it is our weapons that are being used against them. This 
bill just reinforces negative perceptions of the United States in that 
part of the world. What might be the consequences of this? I think we 
need to stop and think about that for a while. We in this body have a 
Constitutional responsibility to protect the national security of the 
United States. This one-sided intervention in a far-off war has the 
potential to do great harm to our national security.
  Perhaps this is why the Administration views this legislation as 
``not a very helpful approach'' to the situation in the Middle East. In 
my view, it is bad enough that we are intervening at all in this 
conflict, but this legislation strips any lingering notion that the 
United

[[Page H2075]]

States intends to be an honest broker. It states clearly that the 
leadership of one side--the Palestinians--is bad and supports terrorism 
just at a time when this Administration negotiates with both sides in 
an attempt to bring peace to the region. Talk about undermining the 
difficult efforts of the president and the State Department. What 
incentive does Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or his organization 
have to return to the negotiating table if we as ``honest broker'' make 
it clear that in Congress's eyes, the Palestinians are illegitimate 
terrorists? Must we become so involved in this far-off conflict that we 
are forced to choose between Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel 
Sharon? The United States Congress should not, Constitutionally, be in 
the business of choosing who gets to lead which foreign people.
  Many people of various religious backgrounds seem determined to 
portray what is happening in the Middle East as some kind of historic/
religious struggle, where one side is pre-ordained to triumph and 
destroy the other. Even some in this body have embraced this notion. 
Surely the religious component that some interject into the conflict 
rouses emotions and adds fuel to the fire. But this is dangerous 
thinking. Far from a great holy war, the Middle East conflict is 
largely about what most wars are about: a struggle for land and 
resources in a part of the world where both are scarce. We must think 
and act rationally, with this fact clearly in mind.
  Just as with other interventionism in other similar struggles around 
the world, our meddling in the Middle East has unforeseen consequences. 
Our favoritism of one side has led to the hatred of America and 
Americans by the other side. We are placing our country in harm's way 
with this approach. It is time to step back and look at our policy in 
the Middle East. After 24 years of the ``peace process'' and some 300 
million of our dollars, we are no closer to peace than when President 
Carter concluded the Camp David talks.
  Mr. Speaker, any other policy that had so utterly failed over such a 
long period of time would likely come under close scrutiny here. Why is 
it that when it comes to interventionism in the Middle East conflict we 
continue down this unproductive and very expensive road?
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and 
the resolution.
  This resolution expresses the solidarity of the Congress and the 
American people with Israel in its struggle against the forces of 
hatred and violence. It is both fitting and appropriate for us today to 
declare our support at a time when Israel has been subjected to 
repeated acts of terror. When 125 people in a small country die in one 
month, when a 17-year old girl cannot make a simple trip to the grocery 
store without fear of being blown up, or when 28 Jews at prayer during 
a Passover Seder are killed in cold blood by a suicide bomber, it is 
time for us to speak out and speak up.
  Israel is our most reliable friend in the Middle East. It is the only 
democracy, a beacon of hope, in a region of the world where the 
freedoms we all take for granted--freedom of speech, freedom of press, 
freedom of religion, freedom to challenge your government nonviolently 
without fear of retribution--simply do not exist. Israel is the only 
country in the Middle East that guarantees all these freedoms.
  Israel, like the United States and every other country, has a right 
and obligation to defend its citizens when under attack. One of the 
reasons I have always been so supportive of Israel is that even when it 
acts to defend itself, it also continues to reach out its hand in peace 
to its neighbors.
  This is a country, who against all odds, made peace with Egypt. It 
made peace with Jordan. It withdrew its forces voluntarily from 
Lebanon. And a year and a half ago, under the guidance of President 
Clinton, this same country offered a historic peace proposal to the 
Palestinians that many thought was too risky. Unfortunately, peace was 
rejected by Chairman Arafat and he chose to return to a path of 
violence and terror.
  The Congress stands here today to condemn and reject this path of 
violence led by the Palestinian leader. Instead, we must return to the 
path of peace. Israel must have a partner who is willing to say ``no'' 
to those who would use terror and violence. Chairman Arafat must take 
action against those Palestinians who would block the path to peace. 
There is no other choice. The time has come for Yasir Arafat to make a 
decision: will he write a page of history by pursuing the path to peace 
or will he be a mere footnote for leaving behind a trail of terror.
  Today we stand by Israel but we also stand for peace. As my friend 
and mentor, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed just before his death: 
``I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outposts 
of democracy in the world and a marvelous example of what can be done, 
how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood 
and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must 
be a reality.''
  Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I supported H. Res. 392, however I 
would have favored a more balanced resolution. As one of 435 members of 
Congress and one who does not serve on the International Relations 
Committee, I offered my views beforehand by respectfully suggesting 
that my colleagues incorporate into their views portions of a similar 
measure put forward by my colleague from Oregon, Representative Peter 
DeFazio, H. Res. 394. While I do not agree with every provision of Mr. 
DeFazio's resolution, I think each one of us can agree this Congress 
should:
  Unequivocally condemn acts of violence against Israeli and 
Palestinian civilians, urge all parties to recognize that continued 
military attacks and terrorist activities will only lead to escalating 
violence and the potential destabilization of the Middle East and 
neighboring regions, and urge all parties to stop using state-
controlled media to incite hatred and violence.
  These are reasonable provisions, and should have been included in the 
text of H. Res. 392.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote 
``yes'' on H. Res. 392. Although I have grave concerns that passing 
this resolution will further inflame tensions in the Middle East, I am 
voting for the resolution in part to dispel any notion that I am anti-
Israel or that I am not sensitive to Israel's right to self-defense. I 
strongly support Israel, but I also strongly support efforts to bring 
about peace in the region, which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian 
people to live together side by side without having to endure an 
endless cycle of violence. In the past, the House has passed similar 
resolutions that I believe have been counterproductive to the peace 
process. I fear that we are doing that again. Our own Secretary of 
State and National Security Advisor have expressed reservations with 
moving forward with this resolution because of the delicacy of the 
situation in the Middle East. I agree with them. We should not be 
bringing up this resolution at this time. That is why I intend to vote 
``no'' on the rule governing debate over H. Res. 392.
  Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I stand today in support of House 
Resolution 392, in which we express America's solidarity with Israel in 
its fight against terrorism. The truth is, the United States and Israel 
are engaged in a common struggle against terrorism. It is a war that 
neither nation sought; it is a war that both nations must win.
  The resolution also calls upon the Palestinian leader, Yasir Arafat, 
to choose peace and to fulfill his commitment to dismantle the 
terrorist infrastructure that threatens the Israeli people. If we had a 
dollar for every time a U.S. official had sent this message to Mr. 
Arafat we would be able to fully fund the war on terrorism. It is my 
prayer, for the sake of Israel and all the Palestinian people who would 
like nothing more than to live in peace, that Mr. Arafat finally honors 
the pledge to peace that he has repeatedly made. The recent Israeli 
incursions into the West Bank have occurred only because Mr. Arafat has 
not lived up to his responsibilities. This resolution we are 
considering today places the obligations to ending terrorism where it 
belongs--on the shoulders of Mr. Arafat.
  All reasonable people begin their discussions of the violence that 
shatters the Middle East from the same position--it is horrible and 
many people on both sides have suffered greatly. The question revolves 
around how it can be revolves so that the people of the region can live 
in peace and build a secure future based on democratic principles. The 
burden has always been placed on Israel to do something for peace. For 
example, it has often been said that if Israel would simply move back 
to its pre-1967 borders there would be peace. But history shows there 
were wars against Israel in 1948, 1956 and 1967--and during that time 
Israel was within the borders that we are today told hold the key to 
peace. Absent a clear, forceful and enduring commitment on the part of 
Mr. Arafat to end terrorism there is no reason to believe those borders 
would produce peace today anymore than they did in the past.
  All this being said, I am not convinced that today's resolution will 
have much of an effect on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In fact, it 
may bring other members in this body to this very House floor with 
resolutions in support of Mr. Arafat. That is their right. However, 
America must speak with one single voice and that voice should belong 
to the president, not members of Congress. It is my hope that we can 
stop the resolutions and allow the administration to work toward 
establishing an atmosphere in which Israel and the Palestinians can 
begin learning how to live side by side in a land where they both have 
long-standing interests.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
Israel, its people, and its future as a vibrant and stable democracy. I 
also rise in support of the Palestinian people and their rights to a 
homeland and to live in peace and security with their Israeli 
neighbors. I rise in support of a future for the Middle East

[[Page H2076]]

in which children--Israeli and Palestinian alike--no longer have to go 
to school in armored busses and no longer have to worry about the 
safety of their mothers and fathers.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give my support to a peace process that 
benefits from the full engagement of the United States and is possessed 
of a fair and balanced approach to the problem. I rise to support a 
plan that understands the concerns of both sides and works to ensure 
that all voices in the region are heard and understood. I rise in 
support of the idea that peace in the Middle East is achievable and 
that two peoples brought together by history and geography can put 
their differences aside in the interests of future generations.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the notion that the United States 
can and must serve as the indispensable nation in the Middle East. Only 
the United States is prepared and equipped to serve as the impartial 
negotiator that is so desperately needed in the region, and I hope that 
our engagement in the current crisis will increase in intensity and 
focus. The current Administration has made a good start in this regard, 
but they can and should do more.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today, finally, in support of the goals contained 
in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which calls for the 
``termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for 
an acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and 
political independence of every State in the area and their right to 
live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats 
or acts of force.'' I urge all parties in the region to vigorously 
pursue efforts to establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in 
the Middle East that will enable Israel and an independent Palestinian 
state to exist within the context of full and normal relations.
  Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for 
House Resolution 392 and my solidarity with the people of the Republic 
of Israel as they battle against terrorism. I also rise to thank Mr. 
DeLay for introducing this resolution, and the 52 members from both 
sides of the aisle that joined me in co-sponsoring this bill.
  Since September 11 the United States and Israel have been linked in 
the same battle, and have fought the same foe. The same forces of evil 
that struck New York and Washington have struck Israel almost every day 
for the last 2 years. The same people who wish to drive Israel into the 
sea wish to drive America from the Middle East.
  Some people wish to draw a line between the United States and Israel, 
and separate our causes. Nothing could be more misguided. Israel and 
the United States are democracies, and our unfree opponents envy us. 
Our religious freedom offends them, for they are free only to worship 
at the state's behest. Our two nation's freely trade with the world, 
and become wealthy, while they see the wealth of their lands stolen by 
their own corrupt leaders. And, in this crisis, we are strong and 
confident, while they know their cause is marching to what Ronald 
Reagan rightly called ``The dustbin of history''. I urge my colleagues 
to join with me in standing with Israel and supporting this resolution.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the pending 
resolution of which I am an original co-sponsor, H. Res. 392, 
expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, Israel and the United States are now engaged in a common 
struggle against terrorism both at home and abroad. The United States 
must stand strongly with Israel during this most trying of times. Since 
2000 Israel has witnessed a horrendous level of terrorist activity 
directed at the civilian population, with scores of Israelis killed by 
suicide bombers and attacks and hundreds injured. While I recognize 
that many Palestinians have also been killed or injured in this 
conflict, only the Palestinians are engaging a systematic and 
deliberate campaign of terror aimed at inflicting as many casualties as 
possible on the civilian Israeli population.
  This ongoing terror campaign is taking a devastating toll on youth 
and families. It is clear that such terrorist activities are 
perpetrated by forces under Yasir Arafat's partial or complete control, 
such as the al-Aqsa Martyrs Bridgades, which is part of Arafat's Fatah 
organization and has been designated as a Foreign Terrorist 
Organization by the United States government. Yasir Arafat and his 
advisers were also involved in the Palestinian Authority's thwarted 
attempt to obtain 50 tons of offensive weapons shipped from Iran in the 
Karine-A. The Palestinian Authority, in addition to other Arab 
governments in the region, continues to provide crucial financial 
support for terrorist acts, such as providing ``martyr'' payments to 
families of suicide bombers.
  Yasir Arafat and members of the Palestinian leadership have failed to 
abide by their commitments to non-violence made in the Israel-PLO 
Declaration of Principles (Oslo accord) of September 1993, including 
their pledges: (1) To adhere strictly to ``a peaceful resolution of the 
conflict,'' (2) to resolve ``all outstanding issues relating to 
permanent status through negotiations,'' (3) to renounce ``the use of 
terrorism and other acts of violence,'' and (4) to ``assume 
responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure 
their compliance [with the commitment to non-violence], prevent 
violence, and discipline violators.'' In my view the continued 
terrorism and incitement committed, supported, and coordinated by 
official arms of the Palestinian Authority are a direct violation of 
these commitments.
  Israel's military operations are an effort to defend it against 
ongoing terrorist activities. Israel has both a legal right of self-
defense and a moral obligation to protect its citizens. The military 
operations are aimed at dismantling the terrorist infrastructure in the 
Palestinian areas, an obligation Arafat himself undertook but failed to 
carry out.
  I am outraged at the ongoing Palestinian terrorist campaign, and I 
have joined with other members of Congress in introducing a resolution 
that insists that the Palestinian Authority take all necessary steps to 
end it. Specifically, I call upon the Palestinian Authority to: (1) 
renounce unequivocally, publicly, and in Arabic all forms of terrorism 
and violence; (2) destroy the infrastructure of Palestinian terrorist 
groups; (3) pursue and arrest terrorists whose incarceration has been 
called for by Israel; (4) either prosecute such terrorists, provide 
convicted terrorists with the stiffest possible punishment, and ensure 
that those convicted remain in custody for the full duration of their 
sentences; or render all arrested terrorists to the Government of 
Israel for prosecution.
  Chairman Arafat has already been put on notice that he must bring an 
end to these terrorists attacks against innocent Israeli civilians. The 
United States must make clear that terrorism and violence can never be 
used as a negotiating tactic. Israel must not make concessions to the 
Palestinians as a result of the latest terrorist attacks. And the 
historic and enduring relationship between the United States and Israel 
will only grow stronger in these times of great turmoil.
  Unless PA Chairman Arafat stops the violence and cracks down on 
terrorist cells under his control and authority, the President should 
seriously consider the suspension of all diplomatic relations with the 
Palestinian Authority. I have also co-sponsored H.R. 1795, the Middle 
East Peace Commitments Act, which would require the imposition of 
sanctions on the PA if Chairman Arafat fails to comply with the many 
commitments he has made in the past to stop terrorist activities that 
are planned or carried out in areas under the PA's control.
  I also encourage President bush to insist that all countries 
harboring, materially supporting, or acquiescing in the private support 
of Palestinian terrorist groups end all such support, dismantle the 
infrastructure of such groups, and bring all terrorists within their 
borders to justice. I commend the President for his strong leadership 
against international terrorism, his forthright response to this most 
recent outrage, and his swift action to freeze additional sources of 
terrorist funds. As the President stated to a joint session of Congress 
on September 2001: ``from this day forward, any nation that continues 
to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as 
a hostile regime.''
  Mr. Speaker, each of us prays for peace in the Middle East, which 
will lead to the creation of a Palestinian state living in peace and 
prosperity alongside a safe and secure Israel. The only way to achieve 
peace is for the Palestinian leaders to not only condemn but to take 
steps to stop terrorism and violence.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in solidarity with 
Israel. I'm proud to make this statement of support today, especially 
in light of the ever-changing news reports coming out of the region.
  The resolution currently on the House floor is simple: the United 
States supports Israel's war against terrorism. Some in the 
international community contend the United States is biased; they 
render our country's support for Israel controversial. They are 
entitled to their opinions, as are we; I firmly believe every American 
makes the right decision when stating support for Israel during this 
turbulent time in history.
  Israel, our sole democratic ally in the Middle East, continues to 
persevere. She has faced many tough times since her declaration of 
Independence, and this threat to Israel's existence surely rates as one 
of her most difficult battles yet.
  Israel fights hatred on a daily basis. This hatred is terrorism. It 
is murder. Israel has every right to defend herself against terrorism. 
When innocent civilians are murdered, over and over again, Israel has 
no choice but to take action.
  Israel is no stranger to difficulty, and no stranger to compromise. I 
continue to support Israel's decision to root out terrorists. I think 
it's natural, and expected, and it must be done just like America's 
efforts in Afghanistan. I also support Israel's recent decision to end 
the situation in Ramallah; the compromise was a

[[Page H2077]]

worthwhile trade-off, consistent with Israel's aim: the obliteration of 
terrorism by getting terrorists off the streets.
  Israel faces daily barages of criticism from her Arab neighbors and 
much of Western Europe, not to mention the United Nations. Sometimes 
she even faces criticism from United States officials. Nevertheless, 
Israel continues to act in the best interest of her people.
  She refused to end military incursions until Israel's security was 
assured. After unsubstantiated Palestinian allegations of a massacre in 
Jenin were publicized by the media, Israel agreed to allow a UN 
factfinding mission entrance after certain conditions were met. These 
guidelines were not followed, and Israel revoked its support for a 
mission; coincidentally, no evidence of a massacre ever materialized, 
and the UN ended its effort as well.
  I firmly believe that difficult decisions will be made in order to 
achieve a permanent peace, and the above decisions are part of this 
process. This resolution is evidence that as Israel fights terrorism 
and searches for a lasting solution to this ongoing crisis, the United 
States will remain at her side.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, 
and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The question is on ordering 
the previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting, if 
ordered, on the question of adoption of the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 328, 
nays 82, not voting 24, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 124]

                               YEAS--328

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Paul
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--82

     Abercrombie
     Allen
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Bereuter
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boucher
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank
     Green (WI)
     Hall (OH)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Honda
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lee
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Matheson
     McCarthy (MO)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rivers
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Serrano
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Udall (CO)
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--24

     Bilirakis
     Brown (FL)
     Burton
     Callahan
     Cannon
     Cooksey
     Crane
     Everett
     Fattah
     Hoekstra
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     McHugh
     Millender-McDonald
     Murtha
     Riley
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Sullivan
     Thompson (MS)
     Traficant
     Wamp

                              {time}  1450

  Ms. SANCHEZ, Mrs. CAPPS, and Messrs. BECERRA, BLUMENAUER, ALLEN, 
GREEN of Wisconsin, PASCRELL, RUSH and SERRANO changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Ms. PELOSI and Mr. McINNIS changed their vote from ``nay'' to 
``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 329, 
noes 76, not voting 29, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 125]

                               AYES--329

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske

[[Page H2078]]


     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Israel
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McGovern
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                                NOES--76

     Abercrombie
     Baldwin
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bereuter
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boucher
     Brown (OH)
     Capuano
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank
     Hall (OH)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lee
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     McDermott
     McKinney
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Payne
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rivers
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Serrano
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Udall (CO)
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--29

     Bilirakis
     Brown (FL)
     Burton
     Callahan
     Cannon
     Cooksey
     Crane
     Dooley
     Everett
     Fattah
     Hoekstra
     Issa
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Linder
     McHugh
     Millender-McDonald
     Murtha
     Norwood
     Riley
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Sullivan
     Thompson (MS)
     Traficant
     Wamp
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1500

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________