Congressional Record, Volume 148 Issue 53 (Thursday, May 2, 2002)

[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 53 (Thursday, May 2, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H2078-H2090]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

EXPRESSING SOLIDARITY WITH ISRAEL IN ITS FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution (H. Res. 392) expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight
against terrorism, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:

H. Res. 392

Whereas the United States and Israel are now engaged in a
common struggle against terrorism and are on the front-lines
of a conflict thrust upon them against their will;
Whereas hundreds of innocent Israelis and Palestinians have
died tragically in violence since September 2000;
Whereas Palestinian organizations are engaging in an
organized, systematic, and deliberate campaign of terror
aimed at inflicting as many casualties as possible on the
Israeli population, including through the use of suicide
terrorist attacks;
Whereas the number of Israelis killed during that time 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;
Whereas 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
(the ``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 nonviolence], prevent violence, and discipline
violators'';
Whereas the continued terrorism and incitement committed
and supported by official arms of the Palestinian Authority
are a direct violation of these commitments;
Whereas the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which is part of
Arafat's Fatah organization and has been designated a
``Foreign Terrorist Organization'' by the United States
Government, and other Fatah forces have murdered scores of
innocent Israelis;
Whereas forces under Yasir Arafat's direct control were
involved in the Palestinian Authority's thwarted attempt to
obtain 50 tons of offensive weapons shipped from Iran in the
Karine-A, and effort that irrefutably proved Arafat's embrace
of the use and escalation of violence;
Whereas the Israeli Government has documents found in the
offices of the Palestinian Authority that demonstrate the
crucial financial support the Palestinian Authority continues
to provide for terrorist acts, including suicide bombers;
Whereas the recent escalation of Palestinian attacks,
killing 46 Israelis during the week of Passover, included a
heinous suicide-bombing at a religious ceremony which killed
27 and wounded more than a hundred, many critically, and was
perpetrated by a known terrorist whom Israel had previously
asked Yasir Arafat to arrest;
Whereas this suicide attack occurred at the very time
United States envoy General Anthony Zinni was attempting to
negotiate a cease-fire that would lead to the resumption of
Israeli-Palestinians political negotiations;
Whereas, just before the Passover attack, Israel had agreed
to General Zinni's cease-fire proposals, whereas Yasir Arafat
rejected them;
Whereas Yasir Arafat continues to incite terror by, for
example, saying of the Passover suicide bomber, ``Oh, God,
give me a martyrdom like this'';
Whereas Yasir Arafat and the PLO have a long history of
making and breaking anti-terrorism pledges;
Whereas President George W. Bush declared at a joint
session of Congress on September 20, 2001, that ``[f]rom this
day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or

[[Page H2079]]

support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a
hostile regime'';
Whereas President Bush recently stated that he ``fully
understands Israel's need to defend herself'' and that he
``respect(s)'' the fact that Israelis have ``seen a wave of
suicide bombers coming to the heart of their cities and
killing innocent people'';
Whereas President Bush, in his speech of April 4, 2002,
stated that ``the situation in which he [Arafat] finds
himself today is largely of his own making''; that Arafat
``missed his opportunities, and thereby betrayed the hopes of
the people he's supposed to lead''; and that, [g]iven his
[Arafat's] failure, the Israeli Government feels it must
strike at terrorist networks that are killing its citizens'';
Whereas Israel's military operations are an effort to
defend itself against the unspeakable horrors of ongoing
terrorism and are aimed only at dismantling the terrorist
infrastructure in the Palestinian areas, an obligation Arafat
himself undertook but failed to carry out; and
Whereas the process of Israeli withdrawal is nearly
complete: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) stands in solidarity with Israel as it takes necessary
steps to provide security to its people by dismantling the
terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas;
(2) remains committed to Israel's right to self-defense and
supports additional United States assistance to help Israel
defend itself;
(3) condemns the recent wave of Palestinian suicide
bombings;
(4) condemns the ongoing support of terror by Yasir Arafat
and others members of the Palestinian leadership;
(5) demand that the Palestinian Authority at last fulfill
its commitment to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in
the Palestinian areas, including any such infrastructure
associated with PLO and Palestinian Authority entities tied
directly to Yasir Arafat;
(6) is gravely concerned that Arafat's actions are not
those of a viable partner for peace;
(7) urges all Arab states to declare their unqualified
opposition to all forms of terrorism, including suicide
bombing;
(8) commends the President for his leadership in addressing
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly the efforts of
the Administration to engage countries throughout the region
to condemn and prevent terrorism and to prevent a widening of
the conflict;
(9) urges all parties in the region to pursue vigorously
efforts to establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace
in the Middle East; and
(10) encourages the international community to take action
to alleviate the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian
people.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). Pursuant to House
Resolution 404, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each will control 30 minutes.
For what purpose does the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall)
rise?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution and
request half of the time.
The SPEAKER pre tempore. Is the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) opposed to the resolution?
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, no, I am not. I strongly support the
resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XV, the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) will control the time in
opposition to the motion.
The Chairs recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for 30
minutes.

General Leave

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield half of my time to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) and ask unanimous consent that he may be
permitted to control that time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos)
will control 15 minutes.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I support the pending resolution offered by my friend,
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), and the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. DeLay) and by many of our colleagues.
For a moment, Mr. Speaker, put yourself in the position of the Prime
Minister of Israel and more importantly in the position of the mothers
and fathers of Israel. And I speak of Jews and Arabs, for both have
been victims. Having concluded an agreement under which the parties
foreswore the use of force to settle political disputes, you are
suddenly subject to violent acts, including eventually the nearly daily
horror of homicide bombings. You realize those acts are not opposed and
actually seem to be supported by the leadership on the Palestine side.
What are you to do? You just take action to defend yourself, your
people, your children; and that is what Israel did and the American
people support it. We must, of course, think beyond the current
situation.
The administration has done a good job at diffusing this crisis and
minimizing the loss of life, but now they must arrive at a method to
determine once and for all if Chairman Arafat, given sufficient
pressure and incentive, can exert the required leadership. If not,
someone with authority must take his place; but for now he is the
leader of the Palestinian people and for their sake, if not his, we
must go the extra mile. This will require a reconstruction on
democratic grounds of the Palestinian Authority, a new deal for the
Palestine people from their leaders. Good government, open markets, not
corruption, cronyism and monopolies must prevail in the Palestinian
areas.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and I have now determined
that we must add to the political and security steps that are part of
the administration's plans. We must add an economic component to
provide a prospect of a better life for the people of the region. A new
Marshall Plan is needed to provide stability in the region, and I hope
to develop a proposal in the near future with the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos).
The leadership of President Bush has been enormously helpful; and I
am proud that he, the Congress, and the American people are standing up
for our friends in the Middle East at this crucial moment in its
history.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
Democratic leader, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt).
(Mr. GEPHARDT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, with this resolution today the House of
Representatives is standing in solidarity with the people of Israel and
for peace in the Middle East. We are defending a people, a democracy,
and a friend that shares our commitment to the universal values
cherished by all human beings in the world.
Since 1948, America has stood with Israel when Harry Truman rejected
the advice of his staff and formally recognized Israel as a sovereign
nation. Since that time Israel's strength and America's leadership have
been essential in advancing these goals. We cannot stand on the
sidelines as Israel's security and the prospect of peace are
undermined.
We must not waiver in our commitment to those, Arab and Israeli
alike, who have chosen the path of peace.
A few months ago I visited the Middle East and saw firsthand that
Israel is in a moment of great danger. Over the past several months
Israel has endured terrorist attacks unrelenting in frequency and
severity. In the past 18 months, more than 450 Israelis have been
killed and over 4,000 have been wounded in attacks. For a country the
size of Israel, these numbers are staggering. Proportionally, this
equates to more than 21,000 American deaths and over 200,000 American
injuries. Yet the Israeli people remain strong, and they remain
determined to increase their security and pursue a lasting peace in the
region.
The American people are also committed to these goals: first, to
preserve and strengthen Israel's security; second, to help Israel and
its neighbors end the violence and the threats posed by terrorism;
third, to resume a dialogue among those committed to a just and lasting
peace for all. This is not an issue that politics should infect.
What is important here is that Americans stand together and be
bipartisan, and that the administration and the Congress speak with one
voice as much as humanly possible on this issue.
We must continue to lead efforts to bring about peace in the Middle
East.

[[Page H2080]]

We are committed to the vision of two independent states living side by
side in peace, security and prosperity. We seek a resolution of the
conflict between Israel and all of its neighbors. We recognize the
humanitarian needs of all people in the region, and we support efforts
to address these needs.
This is an important issue for the security of every human being in
America, everybody in the Middle East and maybe everybody in the world.
With this resolution we will stand by Israel, we will stand for peace,
and we will stand for a future that brings peace and prosperity to all
of the people of the Middle East.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this is probably the most political nonpartisan
resolution in the history of Congress. I have every bit of empathy and
concern for those innocent Israelis that have lost their lives. And the
statistics in the resolution, they have been demonstrated here today;
but no mention has been made of the innocent Palestinians that have
been killed by Israeli forces and settlers. In terms of U.S. numbers,
this amounts to more than 30,000 dead, 120,000 wounded and maimed.
So let us look at this issue in a balanced approach. Let us send a
balanced message to the Middle East. The tens of thousands of Americans
that have come to our Nation's capital demonstrating on both sides,
Israelis have come, Palestinians have come, they need to see that
Washington and the Congress is balanced in our efforts here.
Neither side has fulfilled their agreements under Oslo. Let us get
that straight. You have heard the attacks against Arafat. Sure he has
not fulfilled them. Neither have the Israelis. Neither side, neither
side is an angel here. Neither side is an angel. Let us get that on the
record perfectly clear as well.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Dingell).
(Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, we have seen this resolution or one very
like it before. The same thoughts that we saw before we see before us
today, and that is that this is not a balanced resolution. It is not in
the interests of Israel. It is not in the interests of the Palestinian
people, and it is not in the interest of the United States. It is
simply a denunciation of the Palestinians, and it does nothing to set
out a picture of balance as the position of the United States.
It is time the United States recognizes something. Our commitment,
and I am a part of that, to Israel for its continued existence requires
that there be peace in the Middle East, and it requires that the United
States function as an honest broker and as a friend to all parties and
to all countries in that area. We can and we should and we do and we
denounce terrorism. It is wrong.
But this denunciation of terrorism is not the kind of mechanism that
will bring peace. It does not posture the United States as a friend to
all. It does not posture the United States as an honest broker seeking
to defend the interests of peace and to establish a place and a climate
in which Israelis and Israel and Palestinians and a Palestinian state
may live at peace. It simply takes one side. That is no way to get
ourselves in the position of being an honest broker.
I would like to read something that was said by a man wiser than I
and wiser than most of us here. He said this: ``I truly tell you, we
have before us today an opportunity for peace which time will never
repeat and we must seize if we are really serious in struggling for
peace. If we weaken or fritter away this opportunity we shall end in a
new blood-bath. He who has conspired to lose it will have the curse of
humanity and history upon his head.''
These are the words that Anwar Sadat spoke to the Israeli Knesset in
1977. I would remind you that Sadat, like Yizak Rabin, paid the highest
price for his search for peace.
I would tell you that until the United States recognizes the need for
us and this country to function as an honest broker for peace, there
will be no peace, there will be no security for Israel, there will be
no security for the Palestinians and no security for the United States.
Mr. Speaker, today we are debating yet another irresponsible
Congressional resolution that does absolutely nothing to help end the
violence that plagues the Israeli and Palestinian people. I rise in
opposition to this resolution, which at a very delicate time undermines
the Bush Administration's efforts to ease tensions, end violence, and
bring about a fair peace that will be acceptable and beneficial to
Israelis and Palestinians. This resolution sends exactly the wrong
signal at this perilous time. It will only further fan the flames of
violence, increase regional instability, and compromises our war on
terrorism.
With American forces engaged in battle, the Administration needs
Congress to support its diplomatic efforts, particularly the effort to
bring about peace in Israel and the Occupied Territories. The
Administration needs Congress to support its efforts to engage both the
Israelis and Palestinians as an honest broker that sees the death of
any innocent human being as a tragedy and threat to the long-term
interests of the parties involved, our regional allies, and the United
States. Congress must stand for peace, for it is peace along that will
benefit Israel, Palestine, and the United States. The Administration
does not need Congress to pass one-sided, proactive measures that
undermine U.S. diplomacy and our ability to address this problem, which
has proven to be a cancer on Israel, Palestine, the region, and U.S.
diplomacy.
Consistent and fair U.S. leadership is critical to proving Israel
security and allowing the Palestinian people to live with dignity, and
is the best and perhaps only viable hope for reducing bloodshed. As bad
as the situation is today, there are rays of hope that we must not
block. We have an opportunity for peace, and numerous diplomatic
initiatives--based on U.S. leadership and building on the Mitchell
Committee Report, the Tenet plan, and the Saudi Proposal--that must
move forward. These measures could prevent the widening of this
conflict into a war in which there will not be a winner regardless of
military outcome.
Passage of H. Res. 392 will undermine the Administration, diminish
U.S. leverage with the Palestinians, and further damage U.S.
creditability in the region. If the U.S. fails to act as a peace
proponent now, there will most certainly be a leadership vacuum in the
region. This will hurt our allies, including Israel.
Mr. Speaker, what is the vision of the Administration? Secretary
Colin Powell said that is to build, ``a region where Israelis and Arabs
can live together in peace, security, and dignity.'' To do this he
noted that both parties must take steps, some painful, in order to
reach a just conclusion to this conflict. H. Res. 392 does not embody
this vision, and it does not embody peace.
Why aren't we debating H. Con. Res. 253, a bill I introduced that
endorses the Mitchell Commission recommendations? Why aren't we
debating H. Res. 394, which my colleague from Oregon, Mr. DeFazio,
introduced? Why aren't we debating H. Res. 382, that my friend Alcee
Hastings introduced? All these bills are balanced, and urge a peaceful
settlement to the ongoing conflict that is endangering the region and
the world. Why aren't we urging the parties to work with the
Administration to end the violence and make peace?
Let me read you a statement made from a man wiser than I:

I truly tell you: we have before us today an opportunity
for peace which time will never repeat and we must seize it
if we are really serious in struggling for peace. If we
weaken or fritter away this opportunity we shall end in a new
blood-bath; he who has conspired to lose it will have the
curse of humanity and history on his head.

Mr. Speaker, these are the words Anwar Sadat spoke to the Israeli
Knesset in 1977. Sadat, like Yitzak Rabin, paid the highest personal
price for peace. Let us remember these words and these brave men, and
champion efforts to bring about a just and lasting peace. Let's be on
the right side of history. Vote down this resolution, and support the
Administration's efforts to solve this conflict and bring peace to this
troubled land.

{time} 1515

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde) for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 392 in expressing
America's solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism, and I
commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) for his leadership and the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking minority member of
our committee,

[[Page H2081]]

for their cosponsorship of this resolution which makes several
significant policy statements.
The PLO and Chairman Arafat have long been suspected, but it was only
recently made clear that they were engaged in an organized deliberate
campaign of terror aimed at inflicting as many casualties as possible
on the Israeli population by their suicide bombings. It is obvious that
Mr. Arafat has not been any partner for peace.
The amount of illegal weapons seized from the Palestinians by the
Israelis is decisive evidence of their warlike intentions. Moreover,
Mr. Arafat has continued to incite terror by stating with regard to the
Passover massacre suicide bomber, ``Oh God, give me a martyrdom like
this.''
This proposal concludes that Mr. Arafat and the Palestinian Authority
have failed to abide by their commitments, pursued an ongoing terrorism
campaign against the State of Israel. The Passover massacre was
perpetrated by a terrorist whom Israel had previously had called on Mr.
Arafat to arrest.
This resolution, which I am pleased to cosponsor, maintains its firm
commitment to Israel's right of self-defense. Mr. Speaker, political
disputes can only be solved through negotiation, through compromise and
the building of trust and not by violence and certainly not by suicide
bombings.
Accordingly, I strongly urge support of H. Res. 392, and I urge my
colleagues to fully support this measure.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
(Mr. KILDEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I have always been a strong supporter of the State of
Israel, the people of Israel, and their need to live in peace behind
secure borders, enjoying normal relations with their neighbors and the
world.
I am an equally strong supporter of the rights of the Palestinian
people to live in peace in their own state, behind secure borders,
enjoying normal relations with their neighbors and the world.
I agree with the sponsors of this resolution that the recent spate of
Palestinian suicide bombings of Israeli civilians is horrific, and
deserves condemnation. We must stand united against terrorism, in all
its forms.
However, I am concerned with some of the deficiencies of this
resolution.
President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell are exerting great
efforts to move the Middle East peace process forward. The United
States is the only country that has the resources, the will, and the
influence with both sides to help bring them to a peaceful solution.
Both President Bush and Secretary Powell have raised questions about
the effect of this resolution.
The Congress should rightly praise the President's peace efforts. But
we should also encourage the Arab countries to embrace the Saudi peace
proposal for an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories,
coupled with a complete recognition and acceptance by the Arab
countries of Israel's right to secure borders and normal relations with
her neighbors.
It is also unfortunate that the sponsors of the resolution did not
insert language sought by the Bush White House that would acknowledge
the suffering of the Palestinian people.
Peace will not come to this region until both sides are willing to
give up some of their maximal goals, including the questions of
refugees and settlements. And it means both sides must be invested in
the success of the peace process and in maintaining peaceful relations
between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.
Mr. Speaker, I will vote for H. Res. 392, despite its deficiencies as
a way of expressing solidarity with the people of Israel during a time
of strife. But we must never lose sight of the need to also acknowledge
the suffering and the political rights and aspirations of the
Palestinian people.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, in the last 18 months we have watched while
nearly 400 Israelis, mostly civilians, have died in the violence in the
Middle East. We have watched the escalation that has cost so many
Palestinians their lives in a senseless intifada. We seek an end to
violence and we ask for peace to all the people of the Middle East.
The established Palestinian leadership cannot decide on which side of
the line they stand, but this is a moral line that one cannot straddle
in pursuit of political goals. Whether or not they ordered the
terrorists into action or whether they turned a blind eye, it is they
who are responsible for the violence that kills the innocent and kills
the young people who are suicide bombers today.
Israel is not perfect, but I believe that Israel does not wage war on
innocents. Israel knows that there is no compromise with terrorism.
America lost its innocence after September 11, and that caused us
again to view and understanding of the forces of evil that can threaten
our survival. There is no more important moment for solidarity. With
only 6 million people in the preciously small place, Israel needs our
voice. Our solidarity is borne of our common instinctive response to
that September 11 attack. With this resolution, we renew the solidarity
in a common cause.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
(Mrs. CLAYTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks and include extraneous material.)
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from West Virginia
for yielding me the time.
I am going to enter into the Record at this point a statement by
Desmond Tutu, who asks for a balance for peace and a way to bring peace
together.

[From the Guardian, Apr. 29, 2002]

Apartheid in the Holy Land

(By Desmond Tutu)

In our struggle against apartheid, the great supporters
were Jewish people. They almost instinctively had to be on
the side of the disenfranchised, of the voiceless ones,
fighting injustice, oppression and evil. I have continued to
feel strongly with the Jews. I am patron of a holocaust
center in South Africa. I believe Israel has a right to
secure borders.
What is not so understandable, not justified, is what it
did to another people to guarantee its existence. I've been
very deeply distressed in my visit to the Holy Land; it
reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in
South Africa. I have seen the humiliation of the Palestinians
at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young
white police officers prevented us from moving about.
On one of my visits to the Holy Land I drove to a church
with the Anglican bishop in Jerusalem. I could hear tears in
his voice as he pointed to Jewish settlements. I thought of
the desire of Israelis for security. But what of the
Palestinians who have lost their land and homes?
I have experienced Palestinians pointing to what were their
homes, now occupied by Jewish Israelis. I was walking with
Canon Naim Ateek (the head of the Sabeel Ecumenical Centre)
in Jerusalem. He pointed and said: ``Our home was over there.
We were driven out of our home; it is now occupied by Israeli
Jews.''
My heart aches. I say why are our memories so short. Have
our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation?
Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home
demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned
their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions?
Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the
downtrodden?
Israel will never get true security and safety through
oppressing another people. A true peace can ultimately be
built only on justice. We condemn the violence of suicide
bombers, and we condemn the corruption of young minds taught
hatred; but we also condemn the violence of military
incursions in the occupied lands, and the inhumanity that
won't let ambulances reach the injured.
The military action of recent days, I predict with
certainty, will not provide the security and peace Israelis
want; it will only intensify the hatred.
Isreal has three options: revert to the previous stalemated
situation; exterminate all Palestinians; or--I hope--to
strive for peace based on justice, based on withdrawal from
all the occupied territories, and the establishment of a
viable Palestinian state on those territories side by side
with Israel, both with secure borders.
We in South Africa had a relatively peaceful transition. If
our madness could end as it did, it must be possible to do
the same everywhere else in the world. If peace could come to
South Africa, surely it can come to the Holy Land?
My brother Naim Ateek has said what we used to say: ``I am
not pro- this people or that. I am pro-justice, pro-freedom.
I am anti-injustice, anti-oppression.''
But you know as well as I do that, somehow, the Israeli
government is placed on a pedestal [in the US], and to
criticize it is to be immediately dubbed anti-semitic, as if
the Palestinians were not semitic. I am not even anti-white,
despite the madness of that group. And how did it come about
that Israel was collaborating with the apartheid government
on security measures?
People are scared in this country [the US], to say wrong is
wrong because the Jewish

[[Page H2082]]

lobby is powerful--very powerful. Well, so what? For goodness
sake, this is God's world! We live in a moral universe. The
apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no
longer exists. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pinochet,
Milosevic, and Idi Amin were all powerful, but in the end
they bit the dust.
Injustice and oppression will never prevail. Those who are
powerful have to remember the litmus test that God gives to
the powerful: what is your treatment of the poor, the hungry,
the voiceless? And on the basis of that, God passes judgment.
We should put out a clarion call to the government of the
people of Israel, to the Palestinian people and say: peace is
possible, peace based on justice is possible. We will do all
we can to assist you to achieve this peace, because it is
God's dream, and you will be able to live amicably together
as sisters and brothers.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), a member of the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, Oh, little town of Bethlehem, we witness and
we cry, Israelis and Palestinians, both practice eye for eye.
Made blind by rage and terror, they make a just God cry, and crush
the hopes of all the years while still more children die.
Our senators and congressmen produce a rash appeal, selective words
of blame are used, instead of words that heal.
Put politics and word games before the cause of peace and make it
still more difficult to bring the region peace.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde) for yielding the time to me.
I have been in the People's House, Mr. Speaker, for nine terms, and
during each term, peace in the Middle East has been debated at length.
Here we are again today.
I care not who speaks for Israel or for the PLO, but I do care who
rejects terrorism and who embraces it. We cannot stand idly by and see
innocent persons slain day after day. This peace process must be driven
by reason, not anger and hostility.
Israel has demonstrated that it can live in peace with its Arab
neighbors, and reasonable men and women representing each side of this
conflict should formulate a peace plan whereby bloodshed in the Middle
East becomes a sordid plank of the past, and peace, an ingredient that
sweeps across the Middle East, to be enjoyed by Israelis as well as
Palestinians.
This should be our prayer.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this
important resolution. On September 11, raw, cold blooded terror
exploded in the United States of America, the type of terror that
Israelis know far too well.
Here in the United States we point to one single day, September 11,
and remember the unspeakable carnage and terror. Israelis cannot point
to one single day of terror because they live with terror every single
day.
As someone who lost a family member on September 11, each time a
homicide bomber attacks a cafe in Israel, it reawakens my grief and my
anger, and I know the impact of each explosion is felt in the hearts
and minds of every single American.
Israel and the United States are fighting the same enemy. Our enemies
have different faces but a common objective.
The U.S. has found it easy to identify our enemy but often difficult
to identify our true friends. A friend is someone with whom one shares
a common cause and struggle. Our cause is peace and our friend is
Israel.
It is time to stand up and speak with one resolute voice and say,
Israel, we are in this together.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, is there anyone in this body or Nation that
does not know that the U.S. government is friendly with Israel and
supports their cause? Now, I would ask the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde), the chairman, why were there no hearings? I would ask the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member, why were
there no hearings?
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I will be delighted to respond to the
gentleman.
There was no reason for the lack of hearings. This issue has been
discussed ad nauseam and ad infinitum, and the tragedy which is
unfolding in the area compelled us to move expeditiously. We will be
delighted to have extended hearings, as I am sure the Chairman plans,
on the whole issue of peace in the Middle East.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, as my ranking member and friend knows, we
are trying to construct an environment that we can talk about this
matter among ourselves and that there needs to be a national dialogue
around the country.
I have talked with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) about it,
to which he has agreed. I have talked with the senior Senators from
Delaware, North Dakota, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey).
Here is what Martin Luther King said, ``We are caught in an
inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of
destiny.''
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted and proud to yield 2 minutes
to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), our distinguished
Democratic whip, and my friend and neighbor.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, today as we are engaged in this very sad and difficult
debate on this floor of the House, there is an ongoing tragedy in the
Middle East, and indeed, we mourn the loss of life on both sides of the
conflict.
Yes, the U.S. and Israel have had an unbreakable friendship based on
our shared commitment to peace, stability and democracy. A secure
Israel can only prevail if there is peace in the Middle East.
Less than 2 years ago, Israeli and Palestinian leaders met at Camp
David, and we were hopeful of an agreement that all issues of permanent
status, including the establishment of a Palestinian state and a secure
State of Israel would be resolved.
Prime Minister Barak made a generous and historic proposal. Chairman
Arafat missed that historic opportunity when he failed to seize it and
to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the Middle East crisis.
We must return to that effort sooner rather than later. Neither
Israel nor the Palestinians can afford to abandon the search for peace.
The United States must lead at this critical time. We know that when
the United States is involved, there is less violence in the Middle
East.
Terrorism and suicide bombings must not be the price that is paid for
a free society. The goal of terrorists is to instill fear. They kill
not just to destroy lives but to change the way people live and the way
a country thrives.
In order to build a better future for his people, Chairman Arafat
must become a viable partner for peace. It is only through honest
negotiations, not through violence, that the Palestinians can achieve
their goal, which most of us support, the creation of a Palestinian
state.
That is why I am pleased that the resolution before us today calls
for the international community to provide humanitarian assistance to
Palestinians, and the United States must be a strong part of that. We
must build upon the efforts of the heroes who have built the foundation
for peace. We must honor the legacy of the martyr for peace, Prime
Minister Rabin, and work for a secure Israel and for peace in the
Middle East. As I said, that can only happen with a secure Palestinian
state.
In the spirit of Rabin, we must be guided by his words, ``No more
bloodshed, no more tears.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Hyde) has 9\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from California
(Mr. Lantos) has 10 minutes remaining. The gentleman from West Virginia
(Mr. Rahall) has 23\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I declare my support for the State of
Israel and the security of the Israeli people. I

[[Page H2083]]

also declare my support for a Palestinian state and the security of a
Palestinian people. So I will vote present today because I believe the
security of Israel requires the security of the Palestinians.
I will vote present because I believe the United States can do better
through honest brokering and a principled commitment to peaceful
coexistence. Today we are missing an opportunity to lead people of the
Middle East toward a secure and stable future together.
This resolution equates Israel's dilemma, which is the outcome of the
Palestinian struggle for self-determination, with the United States
campaign against the criminal organization, al Qaeda. Unfortunately,
our own policy is undefined, amorphous, without borders, without limits
and without congressional oversight.
For this Congress to place the historic Israeli-Palestinian conflict
into the context of the current fashion of U.S. global policy pitches,
Israelis and Palestinians alike into a black hole of policy without
purpose and conflict, without resolution.
The same humanity which requires us to acknowledge with profound
concern the pain and suffering of the people of Israel requires a
similar expression for the pain and suffering of the Palestinians. When
our brothers and sisters are fighting to the death, instead of
declaring solidarity with one against the other, should we not declare
solidarity with both for peace so that both may live in security and
freedom?
If we seek to require the Palestinians who do not have their own
state to adhere to a higher standard of conduct, should we not also ask
Israel with over a half century experience with Statehood to adhere to
a basic standard of conduct, including meeting the requirements of
international law?
There is a role for the Congress and the administration in helping to
bring a lasting peace in the Middle East. However, this resolution does
not create that role.

{time} 1530

After today, we will still need to determine a course of action to
bring about peace. This course will require multilateral diplomacy,
which strengthens cooperation among all countries in the region. It
will require focused, unwavering attention. It will require sufficient
financial resources. And it will require that our Nation have the
political will to bring about a true and a fair and sustainable
resolution of the conflict.
When this Congress enters into the conflict and takes sides between
Israel and Palestine, we do not help to achieve peace, but the
opposite. Similarly, the administration should consider that when it
conducts a war against terrorism without limits, the principle of war
is quickened everywhere in the world, including the Middle East. When
it talks incessantly about invading Iraq, the tempo of war is picked up
everywhere.
If we truly want peace in the Middle East, this resolution is
counterproductive. I will vote ``present'' because I do not believe
this resolution dignifies the role towards creating peace which this
Congress can and must fulfill.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), my very learned colleague.
Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, September 11 showed Americans the results of
the devastating effects of terrorism in our lives and communities.
Sadly, citizens of Israel must deal with terrorism every day. The
terrorists want to destroy Israel. As the only democracy in the Middle
East, Israel embodies the ideals and virtues that we treasure as
Americans.
Let us support the people of Israel. The peace will only come when
Israel and its Arab neighbors come together and work out a realistic
and honest agreement. For that to occur, acts of terrorism must end and
Israel's right to exist in peace must be recognized and honored.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
(Mr. SHERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, today Israel faces an attack on its
continued existence by those who reject a two-state solution. Now is
the time for us to demonstrate our solidarity with those under
terrorist attack. We should not be balanced between those who target
civilians for death and those seeking to protect themselves from
terror.
For those who thirst for balance, recognize that this resolution is
but a drop in the bucket of world commentary, and this resolution will
help balance, will help offset the rash of anti-Israel diatribes and
anti-Semitic violence.
Some will disagree with the exact drafting of this or that clause in
this resolution, but the world will little notice the exact text
however. The vote total, will blaze in headlines worldwide. Let that
vote total demonstrate that no one can drive a wedge between the United
States and Israel, and no one can drive a wedge between Democrats and
the pro-Israel community.
Vote yes!
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the cause of peace and to
express my concern about the content and the timing of this resolution,
and I urge my colleagues to vote ``present.''
Just before we adjourned last year, I introduced House Resolution
328, a bill expressing the sense of Congress that during the holiday
season peace should be America's top priority in the Middle East. I was
greatly disappointed, in fact I was shocked, that the leadership
refused to bring up such a mild but hopeful bill on this floor. They
never considered peace a priority.
The killing escalated over the holidays and into this year. What a
corrosive impact this is having on the young minds of our world. If
Congress truly wants to encourage peace, then let us do it
constructively.
I agree with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) that hundreds more
innocent Israelis and Palestinians have died tragically in the ongoing
violence. But his one-sided resolution will only fan the killing
frenzy. It offers no encouragement for the Arab states to have a place
at the peace table.
Israel cannot make peace alone. This resolution envisions no
Palestinian state as key in the peace process. At its worst, I fear it
represents crass domestic politics in this election year. By contrast,
President Bush and Secretary Powell have both asked that Congress put
this bill on hold.
Instead of supporting our ally, Israel, this resolution further
endangers the delicate balance so necessary to bring peace to the
entire region. Let us be a true partner for peace, not just with Israel
but as well with the Arab states in the region, surely those that have
suffered bloodshed in their common cause with Israel, for a just and
lasting peace.
Mr. Speaker, a just peace process must be inclusive or it will not be
sustained. America must stand for inclusion. I urge the Members to vote
``present'' on this resolution, and in this way we will demonstrate
America's continuing support for Israel but also that this resolution
is half-drawn and ill-timed.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton).
Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, I am going to support this resolution.
There is no question about it. We have to support Israel, irrespective
of what party is in charge. The people of Israel are our friends. In
these horrible and dangerous times, we just cannot turn our back on
them. They have to know we are there for them.
Having said that, I must admit that I think the timing of this
resolution leaves a lot to be desired. Here we are at a point of high
tension. Both Israelis and the Palestinians are wounded and desperate
and looking to us for leadership. Secretary Powell has come back from
his trip and Prince Abdullah has made his suggestions. As we sit here,
the quartet, the U.S.-U.N., U.N.-EU, and the Russian Federation are
hammering out some sort of resolution in the White House.
We must support Israel, but we must not turn our back against those
on the other side, and they should know that, because our objective,
primarily, has got to be peace.

[[Page H2084]]

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
(Mr. ENGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution,
in support of Israel, our best ally, with whom we have shared values;
freedom of the press, freedom of speech. Israel is an outpost of
western democracy in a sea of dictatorships and tyrants. If we,
rightfully so, can go halfway around the world to combat terror in
Afghanistan, surely Israel should be allowed to do the same in her own
back yard.
For those who say the timing is wrong, the timing is right. Arafat
has to know now that we will not allow him to use terror as a
negotiating tool. The terror that has come out with the suicide
bombers, three-quarters of those are affiliated with Arafat's Fateh
group. We have to be consistent in the fight of against terrorism. No
double standard. Because if we have a double standard, it undermines
our fight against terrorism, and there is no moral equivalency between
terrorism and self-defense.
People who say we should be more balanced, why is the rest of the
world not balanced? The Arabs will understand and will make peace when
they know that our bond with Israel is unshakable. And this resolution
goes a long way in solidifying that bond.
We must vote ``yes.'' Vote against terror, vote ``yes'' on the
resolution.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), a gentleman who has sponsored a very balanced
resolution in this body.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
When Yasir Arafat walked away from the peace agreement so painfully
negotiated with President Clinton and Prime Minister Barak, he was
recklessly irresponsible and not a leader in the interest of peace. He
provided the fuel for the current endless, downward spiral of violence.
But when Ariel Sharon engaged in provocative foray to the Temple
Mount to foster his political ambitions, he provided the spark that
ignited the fuel of Arafat and the current violence. And his actions
since then have only fanned the flames. These are not men who will lead
to peace, neither of them.
The United States must stand tall as a powerful and honest broker of
a balanced plan for peace. I believe that President Bush and Secretary
of State Powell have made a strong and credible effort to bring an end
to the violence and to begin a negotiated peace. They have offered a
balanced plan. I have offered a resolution which mirrors their balanced
plan. It will not be considered. It is not allowed to be debated. It
will not be voted upon as an alternative. We only have this one
resolution before us, which is totally slanted and biased and will only
encourage more irresponsibility by Ariel Sharon.
I thought there was one thing that might turn the tide in this
struggle, and it was a horrible tragedy in the end of March. Look at
these two young women. They look like sisters. One, Ayat al-Akhras, 18,
was a suicide bomber who killed Rachel Levy at the grocery store, age
17. I thought that both sides would be so appalled by this unbelievable
tragedy and see the hopelessness of this that they might turn toward
peace. But, no, that has not happened there.
Let that happen here, in the home of democracy and peace. Let us not
have the United States Congress somewhere to the right of the Likud in
Israel. Let us have the United States Congress stand up for the
American people, for peace and democracy in the Middle East. And this
resolution that we are being forced to vote on today will not lead us
in that direction.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the distinguished chairman of the
Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote for this resolution, with
reservations. I will vote for it because the opposite perspective would
be inexplicable. However, I have reservations on process and
substantive grounds.
This resolution is pressed in this body at this time, without
administration support and without review by the committee of
jurisdiction, all apparently because of concern that the Senate might
competitively address the issue before the House.
Substantively this resolution is unbalanced, untimely, and
potentially counterproductive to the foreign policy interests of the
United States and, implicitly, the viability of the State of Israel.
It is the case that this Congress must unequivocally support the
existence of the state of Israel. This is a moral imperative. But if
Israel is to provide security for its people, it must recognize that
the Palestinian people, despite a leadership that has misserved it,
have legitimate aspirations. There can be no security for either
Israelis or Palestinians unless fair and equitable borders are
established delineating both a Palestinian and Israeli state.
This resolution asserts a common U.S.-Israeli position on terrorism.
The more difficult quid pro quo is to come: The expectation that if the
United States and international community broker a credible peace
agreement, the Knesset will seize the future and rise above the
politics of the moment.
We in this body can express with ease, and perhaps too much glibness,
rhetorical concerns of the nature contained in this bill. What will be
quantumly more difficult is for the Knesset and the Palestinian
Authority to reach an accord that can provide for a future of peace and
stability. Parties in the region simply must demonstrate more courage
and more balanced judgment than this Congress is doing today.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
before yielding to my next speaker, to just point out to my colleague
who equated a suicide bomber with a victim that that is precisely what
this resolution is all about. There is no moral equivalence between a
suicide bomber and an innocent victim of a suicide bomber. I find this
analogy he portrayed sickening.
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel).
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
With the passage of this resolution, we stand in solidarity with
Israel and with her people, and offer our support and our sympathy. We
are outraged by the use of terror against innocent civilians. It is
time for the Arab leaders and the Palestinian leaders to completely
renounce the use of terror, in word and in deed.
There is no moral equivalency, as my friend from California has said,
between the use of terror against innocent civilians and with Israeli
self-defense. There are simple truths here. Israel has the right to
defend herself, and this country should not be putting limits on that
right of self-defense.
I will join three of my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, in a trip this
weekend to Israel to demonstrate by our presence the solidarity and
concern and support that this House will voice through a majority vote
here today.

{time} 1545

We stand with Israel. Our support is rock solid, and Israel will
survive.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Bonior).
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this
resolution. This resolution blindly supports Israel's actions against
the Palestinians and wholly denies the generations of suffering of the
Palestinian people. This would be wrong at any time, but in light of
what has happened at Jenin and Bethlehem, Ramallah, Haifa, Jerusalem,
and Netanya, and what continues to happen today, this resolution is
dangerous.
Like most Americans, I support Israel. However, just like most
Americans, I do not support and will not support all of Israel's
policies. Generations of Palestinians and Israelis have suffered in the
region, but the violence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be
examined or addressed in isolation of decades of occupation of millions
of Palestinians.
Israeli suffering is something that this body understands and
discusses. But what of the suffering of the Palestinian people? What of
the history of

[[Page H2085]]

land confiscation, water rights, torture, settlements, collective
punishments, home demolitions, curfews, administrative detentions,
expulsions, child labor? Where is the language about the 1,000-plus
Palestinians killed in the last 19 months, bodies found under rubble?
Where is the language about the thousands made homeless by the
bulldozers in Jenin alone? Where is the language about the relief
agencies denied access to treat the sick and wounded? We know that
relief agencies, including the International Committee of the Red
Cross, were prevented from reaching and evacuating and treating the
sick and wounded throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip, resulting in
untold deaths, from the mother who bled to death from a normally
nonfatal wound in front of her children, to the couple buried alive
under rubble for 8 days. The stories coming to light are horrific.
Rarely on this floor is there discussion of the nearly 420
Palestinian villages destroyed at the time of Israel's founding in
1948, or the 3.8 million refugees registered by the United Nations or
the estimated 2 million others not registered. Palestinians live in 59
different recognized refugees camps in misery, in poverty, with no hope
of a better future for the next generations that are born into those
camps.
Can we know today what 38 percent employment in the West Bank or 75
percent unemployment in Gaza can do to a population? While we cling to
the hope of peace that Oslo would bring, Palestinians saw a remarkable
growth in settlements. As of February, Peace Now estimates the
settlers' population at 230,000, having approximately doubled in the
last 10 years under Oslo.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a good resolution. I encourage Members to
vote against it.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Nevada (Ms. Berkley).
Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution
and as an advocate of a strong American-Israeli relationship. No
country in the world is more familiar with what we Americans
experienced on September 11 than is Israel.
There are those who object to Israel's actions of self-defense. I ask
those Members, what is America doing in Afghanistan? Are Israeli
victims of terror in some way different from American victims? Do
Americans have a right to self-defense and Israelis a right to die? The
peace process is dead because the Palestinians killed it. It is time
for Yasir Arafat and the so-called Palestinian leadership to express
their desire for a Palestinian state living peacefully next to Israel
rather than a Palestinian state in the place of Israel; and they need
to say it in English and Arabic.
The crisis in the Middle East has nothing to do with a Palestinian
homeland. The Israelis have agreed to that long ago. It has everything
to do with the survival of the State of Israel, which the Palestinians
have yet to recognize. This resolution sends a clear message to the
supporters of terrorism and the enemies of Israel that America will
never be an ally to those who commit terror.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members to support this resolution and stand,
as this Member does, side by side with the people of the State of
Israel.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Inslee).
(Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, of course Israel has a right to a military
response to this immoral terrorism. Of course we stand with Israel. But
this resolution has a major omission: it is too weak for America. It
does not cut the mustard for America because it does not allow America
to fulfill its manifest destiny of the only hope in the world of a
force for peace to be an honest broker to help find justice and peace
in this region of the world.
It rightfully expresses our permanent, unalterable commitment to the
security of a Jewish state in Israel, and it wrongfully excludes any
reference, any reference of a recognition or even our interest in
recognizing the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people for a
viable state of their own. This is the national policy of the United
States of America, but it was omitted from this resolution for
partisan, political purposes.
We rightfully condemn suicide bombing, but we cannot blind ourselves
to the reality that when the world's only superpower totally ignores
one people, it cannot serve effectively to bring peace to the other. We
owe the Israeli people more than blind obedience to any of their
government's policies. We cannot be a blinded giant. We owe them
honesty, and it is honest to say that a national policy of refusing to
accept and recognize the legitimate right of Palestinians to a viable
state is not a step on the road to peace. Ultimately there will be
justice for both, or there will be peace for neither. We know that
violence breeds when hope dies and both parties are blinded by hate.
Only we can bring hope to this region.
Mr. Speaker, in doing so, we ought to give Israel the same love and
assistance we would give our own brother. So as we would speak up when
our brother makes a judgment as to his own harm, so we ought to speak
out and say that the settlement policy on the West Bank is hurting
Israel. In our acquiescence, our silence in this resolution hurts
Israel and does not serve her true vision of high moral values for
which we have always admired her.
Mr. Speaker, to make it abundantly clear what this debate is about,
and I see the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has stepped out, I
would ask the majority party: Would the majority leadership accept a
unanimous consent request to add to this resolution a simple sentence
that would recognize the hope of the American people that both these
parties can find viable states of their own, living in peace, one next
to the other?
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. INSLEE. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am not in a position to accept that
statement at this time.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, that is most regrettable because that is the
aspiration of the American people and the world, and we ought to
fulfill it.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I deeply regret that I must vote
against this resolution, not for what it says, but for what it does not
say. Of course I agree with the strong condemnation of Palestinian
suicide bombings killing so many innocent Israeli civilians. Terrorism
is utterly intolerable, and it cannot be rationalized by other
injustices.
The Palestinian leadership's choice of violence against the innocent
as a weapon of war does in fact justify retaliation. But how I wish we
could have a leader with the greatness of Ghandi in the Middle East who
understood that violence begets violence, as it has catapulted the
region into killing and destruction.
I must oppose this resolution because it is unbalanced and, thus, I
believe counterproductive in bringing long-term peace and security to
the people of Israel. It does not reference President Bush's words of
April 4 and America's consistent foreign policy that Israel must stop
the expansion and withdraw from the Palestinian-controlled territories
before a sustainable peace can be achieved.
This country supports U.N. Resolution 242, and Israel's unwillingness
to comply is a contributing factor to the cycle of violence and
despair.
This House resolution does not make it clear, as Deputy Secretary of
Defense Paul Wolfowitz said before thousands at an Israeli rally that
America mourns the deaths of all innocent life, Israeli and
Palestinian. Over 1,500 Palestinians and 500 Israelis have been killed
just since September.
Yes, many Arabs hate the U.S. for our prosperity and our way of life,
but they especially hate us because they see us as turning a blind eye
towards the aggression and adding to the daily humiliation that hardens
the hearts of even the most peace-loving Palestinian people. And, yes,
shame on the Arab states for too often being part of the problem rather
than the solution, but their values and actions are not the standard by
which we must measure ours. Our response should not be to further
alienate these states, thus undercutting our efforts to persuade our
Arab allies to help stem the Palestinian violence.

[[Page H2086]]

We as a Nation are defined by our respect for all innocent human
life, and believe that our power has a purpose to promote peace,
understanding and mutual interdependence among all of the neighbors of
the world. When whole towns and villages are reduced to rubble, when
innocent loved ones are killed indiscriminately, and when the
Palestinian people have been treated with such contempt by their
occupiers, it breeds rage and desperation among a whole new generation
of avengers; and a whole new cycle of vengeance, by any means, begins.
That is not in our interest; and it is certainly not in Israel's
interest, whose existence, security and future is not best served by
this unbalanced resolution; and that is why it should be rejected.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Issa).
(Mr. ISSA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yield me this time
to speak in favor of a bill, not because it is perfect, because like
many of our resolutions, and like many Members have said, it is less
than perfect. It does not speak in a balanced fashion about some of the
other shortcomings.
But I believe on the floor today we have to make a statement, a
statement that the violence must end. A statement that now that
Chairman Arafat has at least limited freedom of movement again, that he
use this second chance to bring about an end to violence and a
resumption in the altogether too necessary compromises that must be
made if we are going to have peace in the Middle East, peace that will
benefit both sides, that will end the violence on both sides, that will
save lives on both sides.

{time} 1600

So although we could all speak and speak rightfully about what is not
in this legislation, or even what is maybe wrong in the resolution, I
would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for this, to
make this strong statement.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may
consume to my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
(Mr. LYNCH and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I realize that there are many Members that
wanted to speak on this resolution today; and unfortunately for me, my
seniority does not allow me to have an opportunity to speak.
I have some remarks here, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this resolution
and in support of the people of Israel, and I will enter them into the
Record at a later date.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler).
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, the United States must stand in solidarity
with Israel during this devastating time. Hundreds of Israelis have
been murdered by Palestinian terrorists; and make no mistake, Yasir
Arafat is directly responsible. The stark reality is that Arafat is no
longer even remotely a partner in peace. Just the opposite. Arafat has
eviscerated the promise he made at Oslo to renounce the use of violence
against Israel. Just as we as Americans defend ourselves against
terror, Israelis have the right, the obligation, to defend themselves
against terror.
It is unacceptable to condemn both Israel and Arafat simultaneously,
as if there was any moral equivalency in their actions. This Congress
must never rationalize or explain away acts of terror. What should be
the message from Washington to Israel is, Mr. Sharon, defend your
people, destroy the infrastructure of terror, and know that America
stands with you.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, sometimes God puts you at the right
place at the right time, and I know he did not want to hear that from
us from the floor of the House. I know what he wanted to hear from us
was let there be peace on Earth, and let it begin with me. Let there be
peace on Earth, and let it begin with me.
Let me step up to the plate and say to the world, I want peace, and I
am going to do what it takes to give peace. Let me step up to the plate
and say to the world, I have it within my power, within my hand, to
make peace.
As a kid, remember that saying they used to say, ``sticks and stones
may break my bones, but names will never hurt me''? All we have is
names on this piece of paper, throwing words.
If we as a Congress sincerely believe in peace in the Middle East,
let us get on some planes and go over there and sit down and talk to
the people in the Middle East and make a difference. Let us stop
talking and step up and give some action.
I support Israel. I support Israel. My congressional district has
many, many people of Jewish descent; and I am pleased to represent
them, but I am pleased to believe in peace. Let there be peace on
Earth, and let it begin with this Congress. Let us stop throwing words
across the floor and every which way and make a difference.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
Mrs. CLAYTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I think it has been established that I am pro-Israel and
I am also pro-peace and I am also pro-Palestine. We need to find a way
to bring people together.
I just want to quote just very briefly from a very insightful article
by Desmond Tutu. He says, ``In our struggle against apartheid, the
great supporters were Jewish people. They almost instinctively had to
be on the side of the disenfranchised, of the voiceless ones, fighting
injustice, oppression and evil. I have continued to feel strongly with
the Jews. I am a patron of a Holocaust center in South Africa. I
believe Israel has a right to secure borders.
``What is not so understandable, however, not justified, is what it
did to another people to guarantee its existence. I have been very
deeply distressed in my love for them and my love for the Holy Land. It
reminds me much of what has happened to us as black people in South
Africa. I have seen the humiliation of the Palestinians. Surely there
are those who want terror, but not all the Palestinians. We need to
find how we bring our beloved Israel and Palestine together for
peace.''
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch).
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to read the
resolution, because what the resolution does is it speaks truth to
power. Some of my colleagues who have spoken against the resolution I
do not believe have read it, because there is nothing that is factually
inaccurate in this resolution.
It talks about, unfortunately, what is going on in Israel today.
There is no Yasir Arafat exemption to the war on terrorism. What is
going on today in fact is terrorist actions; and when those bombs are
going off, whether it is in a Cafe in Haifa or Jerusalem or Natanya,
they are not just trying to kill Jews. In fact, some Arabs have been
killed, many Arabs have been killed by terrorist acts themselves. But
in essence it is terrorist action against America.
We need to pass this resolution. There are other issues we can talk
about at another time. I urge my colleagues to read the resolution. As
my good friend and colleague from California on the other aisle, who
has been as concerned as any Member in this Chamber of the plight of
the Palestinian people, and I praise him for his commitment to vote
yes, I urge my friends and my colleagues on this side of the aisle to
join with him and let there be no votes against this resolution, even
with the objections that people have to the fact that some things are
left out.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my good
friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
(Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me time and for his leadership on this important issue, and I
stand strongly in support of his resolution.
For 54 years, Israel has experienced terrorist attacks similar to the
ones our country suffered on September 11.

[[Page H2087]]

After 9-11, our country took swift and sure action against the al
Qaeda. Every Nation has the right to protect its population against
terrorists, particularly terrorists that target civilians. That is what
we are doing in the U.S., and that is what Israel should be allowed to
do.
The world should recognize that Israel has the right to use military
means to protect its citizens and its borders. I welcome President
Bush's decision to increase American involvement in efforts to reach a
diplomatic solution to the current violence. Israelis and Palestinians
must find a way to live peacefully with each other, and we have the
moral obligation and strategic imperative to make that happen.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining, the gentleman
from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining and the
right to close.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate those who have taken
part in this debate. Except for a few shrill voices, there has been an
honest exchange of views by all the Members here. And although that
does not correct a faulty proceeding that brought this measure to the
floor without a single hearing, can you imagine a motion of this
moment, a resolution of this gravity, to never land down in the
Committee on International Relations? I would say to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. DeLay), you are a political genius. What you know about
foreign affairs, we will determine in the months to come.
But what is most needed in Washington is an inclusive, open and
respectful dialogue. And guess who has got to lead it? Us. There is
nobody else in the United States. The Congress has to lead the
dialogue.
In the world, the United States has to lead the dialogue. Is there
anyone that has a reservation about that point? I would yield to them
immediately. Because we know that if peace is to come to the troubled
Holy Land, it will come with the United States of America playing the
major role as mediator, facilitator, and monitor. So our credibility
must be as impeccable as we can possibly make it.
The Secretary of State has told us very clearly that certain
resolutions hinder our ability to play a constructive role. The
Secretary of State says we must be very careful about the messages we
send. The President of the United States begged the gentleman from
Texas not to send anything to the floor only recently.
So what I am saying is that we must realize that our role is not
merely taking sides, but is acting as the world leader. It is in our
hands, it is only in our hands, and I urge you to conduct yourselves
accordingly.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, Israel, like every other nation, has the
right to self-defense. This resolution expresses our solidarity with
Israel as she defends herself against the barbaric campaign of
terrorism and expresses our determination that the violence must end.
We are told the resolution is not balanced, but we should not be
balanced between Palestinian terrorists and Israeli victims; between an
Israel that offered breathtaking concessions for peace, and Arafat, who
walked away from the table and deliberately started a war.
We should not be balanced between the Palestinian Authority, whose
method of negotiation is to murder as many Israeli civilians as
possible in restaurants and pizza parlors and Passover seders, and
Israel which exercises its right to defend its people by attacking
terrorists and gunmen, not innocent civilians.
We all want peace, but to attain peace we must stand in solidarity
with Israel so Israel can feel secure in seeking peace.
We can and should be an even-handed broker during negotiations, but
we must stand forthrightly with Israel now against the terrorists if
there are ever to be again real negotiations.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
close on my side.
Mr. Speaker, this has been an interesting debate today; and I do
congratulate all those that have participated in it and followed it,
because it is a very emotional issue, it is a very difficult issue and
a very delicate issue.
There is no question, as I said in my opening comments, that America
stands by Israel. They are our ally and should always be. Israel must
protects itself. But the important question that we must ask is how
Israel must protect itself.
The first step is to acknowledge its role in creating the violent
conditions in the region. The time has come to stop blaming everything
on Arafat. That just will not get it anymore. Getting Arafat is no
solution. I am not here to defend him, nor defend his actions. But
getting Arafat is not the solution that is going to bring us peace.
Continued humiliation is no solution. This is a method of operation
of bullies, not of those who want to return to the peace process, to
the negotiating table. ``Whereas anybody involved,'' that means give
and take. Is that the real fear here of going to the negotiating table,
where it means you have to give up something? Does the father of the
Israeli settlement policy, the current Prime Minister, really fear
about going to negotiations? That is a question that I think is
legitimate to ask.

{time} 1615

The military option will not secure a peace in the Middle East. The
military option will not work. No peace can be achieved. There are many
steps that we can take to offer a balanced approach too numerous to
mention at this particular time. But the bottom line is we cannot
dispossess a people and then attempt to govern them by occupying their
land, by forcing them to subsist in refugee camps, by blocking roadways
to their jobs, by refusing access to medical attention, by cutting them
off from their schools and universities, and by discounting their
humanity. This is not the roadway to peace.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I think the bottom line is the
Palestinians crave the recognition of their dignity; Israelis crave the
dignity of recognition. It is incumbent upon this Congress to recognize
both and do both. I ask for rejection of this one-sided resolution.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for an additional
1\1/2\ minutes so that we may accommodate the gentlewoman from Florida
(Mrs. Meek). She will be our last speaker before I close.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). Does the gentleman ask
unanimous consent that both the opponents and proponents of the
resolution be given an additional 1\1/2\ minutes?
Mr. LANTOS. I am delighted to do so, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I really do
not want to object, but a lot of people are trying to get planes this
afternoon. The weather is very questionable. I am sure her minute and a
half is not going to upset us too much, but if we could hold it to
that.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, we appreciate that very much.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I shall
not object, but I do want to note that this has been a good debate, and
I would not object to the extension of more time, even another hour or
2, or even 3 hours. I think we need to debate this issue more fully. It
certainly has been debated fully in the Knesset in Israel, and I am
glad to see this debate in the House of Representatives this afternoon,
and I hope we will have more such debates.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr.
Rahall) each will receive an additional 1\1/2\ minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Florida (Mrs. Meek).
Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) for yielding me this time.

[[Page H2088]]

Unlike many of my colleagues, I do not profess to be a professor of
foreign affairs, nor a diplomat. I come to this floor today to speak to
my colleagues about Israel. I am a friend of Israel and I have been for
more than 40 years. I do not plan to change now. I will remain so. I
think the people of Israel and Israel itself has been my friend, so I
do not plan to stay away from a friend of such long standing. I think
that we should pass this resolution. We should not worry about the
timeliness of it, but we should think about whether it is right or
whether it is wrong, and when it comes to helping a friend who has been
our friend for many years, a friend who believes in democracy, and a
friend who believes in freedom.
So we do not have a big debate here today, but we have people who
believe in the right thing as they see it. The people of Israel deserve
our support at this time. Whenever we have a friend in trouble, what do
we do? We stand alongside of that friend. There is no right and left of
this issue. There is only the right way, the straight and narrow way.
It is a hard decision for many of my colleagues who are experts in
foreign affairs, but I am saying be an expert of the people of Israel
who have had to suffer for many years.
Now is the time for us to stand up, straighten up and fly right.
There is no good frog that will not praise his own pond. Israel is a
part of our pond.
Let there be no mistake about it, I am a friend of Israel--I have
been since the forties--I will remain so. Israel must continue to have
the right to exist.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this important resolution
expressing our solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution sends a vital message: that we stand
firmly with Israel and for peace and justice within the region. There's
a debate as to the timeliness of this resolution--but I think the real
issue is to stand up for peace at any time the people of Israel and
their friends have stood for me.
The resolution reaffirms our unwavering commitment to Israel's
security and welfare, to the special relationship between the United
States and Israel, and to the values of democracy and freedom that our
two countries share. It supports Israel's right to defend its people
from terrorism. I stand firmly with Israel and against terrorism. All
of us should.
Mr. Speaker, I fervently hope and pray that our efforts and those of
the parties to the ongoing negotiations will achieve a real peace in
the region and justice for Israelis and Palestinians. Yet however long
and crooked the path to real peace may prove to be, we must be clear
that we will never allow anyone in the Middle East to choose terrorism
as a method of diplomacy.
Israel is making progress toward returning the region to some degree
of normalcy.
America must continue to stand firm in its support of Israel in her
time of need. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Israeli people, and
with all who are committed to a just, lasting and permanent peace of
freedom, security, and liberty for all in the region.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).
(Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution is far from perfect; however, in the
context of an ongoing peace seeking process, this reaffirmation of
America's bond with Israel is a vital step forward. God has blessed
America. We are the only remaining superpower in the world. We, the
people of the United States, alone have the capacity to serve as the
Great Angels of the 21st Century. We can lead the way to solve the most
intractable problems. The fullest possible engagement in the Mid East
is now a necessity. We must now go the final mile and offer all the
resources that we can muster to encourage peace. The whole world knows
the self-evident truth that in our hearts and souls we are wedded to
Israel. There is no formal treaty that states the obvious; however, it
is understood that a threat to the survival of Israel is a threat to a
piece of America. We are brothers and sisters for democracy; for
freedom; for equality; for the equal treatment of both genders; for
recognition and respect for all races, religious and creeds. Against
the overwhelming residue of oppressive governance throughout the world,
America and Israel are leaders for enlightenment and liberating
progress. Who among us, if forced to make the choice, would not want
his children to live in the State of Israel, instead of any one of the
despotic, oppressive surrounding Mid East nations. Our world has been
plunged into a war against more than terrorism. We are in a war against
technologically advanced barbarism. We, too, have a tradition that
believes in martyrdom, but it is not based on the reckless courage of
murderers. The Christians who met Nero's lions were martyrs; the
followers of Ghandhi were martyrs; the slain American civil rights
freedom fighters were martyrs; suffering 27 years in prison, Nelson
Mandela emerged as a martyr and invited three of his prison guards to
dine with him at the presidential inauguration banquet. There are
millions of us who are determined to continue the fight for justice for
all. But the martyrdom of suicide bombers will never bring freedom and
justice. And peace can never be achieved merely with tanks and guns.
``War never leaves us thrilled/But maniacs demand to be killed.'' After
we have blocked the murders of the maniacs, we must then go on to take
the greatest risk. America must dare to exert a total pressure for
peace. We must take the greatest risk of all. The Great Angels of
America must be willing to support a formal treaty which guarantees
defensible borders for Israel and guarantees an independent Palestinian
state. No troops will be necessary to accomplish this feat. Our
overwhelming moral force is adequate. We must just state this goal, set
a deadline and make peace a reality. We shall overcome.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close for my side. It has been a good debate. The bottom line is,
Israel is a democracy and Israel is our friend, and Israel is our ally
in the global war against terrorism.
In our war against Iraq 10 years ago, Israel stood with us. In our
war against terrorism today, Israel is standing with us. In turn, we
must stand with Israel in its war against terrorism.
Mr. Speaker, it is particularly important that we adopt this
resolution now at a time when Israel is subject to a vicious chorus of
blind and bigoted hate. Our friends in Israel must be assured that they
are not alone in facing the terrorist onslaught. We must make clear
that there is no moral equivalence between terrorism and self-defense.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to rise to the occasion and
show our strong solidarity with the democratic state of Israel in our
shared struggle against terrorism.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from West Virginia seek
to use his additional minute and a half?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
Again, I say that there are other approaches and more balanced
approaches that we can take that would further the cause of peace and
that would further American interests in the region and certainly do
this Congress a great deal more credibility. I do notice the main
sponsor of the resolution has just walked on to the floor, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), and I want to commend him for the
last 2 sentences that he finally put in his resolution, urging all
parties to pursue and establish a just and lasting and comprehensive
peace in the Middle East, which I believe is only the second time in
the whole resolution where the word ``peace'' was used, but
nevertheless he finally got around to that. Then he did mention the
suffering and the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people in the
very last line, and I appreciate that.
I would ask him as he gets ready to close if he would also agree to
the inclusion in his resolution of a line which, as President Bush has
stated, recognizing the Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has
4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished whip.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his work on this
resolution and his indulgence and his stature, and I appreciate his
support. I also thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the
ranking member on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for his incredible
courage and principle in co-authoring this resolution, and I appreciate
his friendship.
Mr. Speaker, these are very serious times. The principles and virtues
that all of us revere and respect about America are under assault today
in the Middle East. The people of Israel are

[[Page H2089]]

resisting a wave of terrorism. As we watch that violence directed
against Israel, we are roused to resolve that terrorism, in all its
forms, has to be defeated. There is no moral equivalence, there is no
moral equivalence between a democratic government defending its
citizens and a calculated strategy of death waged by terrorist
organizations.
Homicide bombings are evil incarnate. On the scales of justice and
morality, they are no different from the attacks launched against the
United States just last September. They serve only to satisfy the
gruesome appetites of pure hatred and unrestrained wickedness, and they
demonstrate beyond question that the abiding threat to peace in the
Middle East stems from the groups which exist for the single purpose of
destroying Israel.
The citizens of free nations share a very special bond. It flows from
our common commitment to a set of enduring principles. We trust
democracy. We defend human rights. We live under the rule of law, and
we seek good relations with every country wishing to coexist peacefully
with other countries. Israel is the lone bastion of freedom in the
region. Within Israel's own neighbors, peaceful transitions are nothing
more than accidents of fate. Describing these countries as genuine
democracies would be as inaccurate as calling an acorn an oak tree.
It is time for every country in the Middle East to pass a fundamental
test of a civilized world by unequivocally rejecting terrorism and
acknowledging that bombings and other acts of terror render any
underlying cause of terror or grievance illegitimate. Mr. Speaker, it
is the test that President Bush laid down in this Chamber, right here,
when he said, you are either with us or you are with the terrorists.
The men and women of Israel must know that we recognize the broader
significance of this struggle, that the attacks directed against Israel
are attacks against liberty, and all free people must recognize that
Israel's fight is our fight. Let every terrorist know that the American
people will never abandon freedom, democracy, or Israel. America will
never permit the Jewish state to fall to aggression.
The search for peace cannot diminish and must not obscure the very
key lessons of the past 40 years. Democracies must never negotiate with
terrorists. And for that reason, Yasir Arafat strikes many of us as a
highly unreliable vessel to carry the hope for peace. To turn from his
past, it would be very difficult for him to do. The most promising sign
for both the people of Israel and the Palestinian people would be the
emergence of a moderate Palestinian leader who truly seeks a negotiated
settlement for lasting peace. The United States cannot be a broker
between one party that wants peace and the other party that wants
terrorism. It cannot succeed. It has not succeeded. The peace process
has been a failure for over 25 years. Today, the Palestinian men and
women who wish nothing more than just to raise their family in peace
have no voice. In fact, they are killed if they raise their head of
moderation. Nothing will do more to bring peace to this region than the
emergence of a Palestinian leader with the courage and support of the
United States to accept Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and a
willingness to acknowledge Israel's legitimate security considerations.
But until that day comes, every man and woman in Israel should know
that they do not stand alone, because America stands with them.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Hyde) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution, H. Res. 392, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.

Recorded Vote

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 352,
noes 21, answered ``present'' 29, not voting 32, as follows:

[Roll No. 126]

AYES--352

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Borski
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clement
Clyburn
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
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Doggett
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
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
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Lynch
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
Norwood
Nussle
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Waters
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--21

Abercrombie
Bonior
Boucher
Condit
Conyers
DeFazio
Dingell
Hilliard
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Kleczka
Lee
McKinney
Miller, George
Obey
Paul
Petri
Rahall
Rohrabacher
Smith (MI)
Stark

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--29

Baldwin
Barr
Becerra
Bishop
Brown (OH)
Capuano
Clayton
Farr
Hostettler
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kucinich
McDermott
Mink
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Oberstar
Payne
Peterson (MN)
Rivers
Sabo
Sanders
Solis
Thompson (CA)
Thurman
Watt (NC)
Woolsey

NOT VOTING--32

Bereuter
Bilirakis
Brown (FL)
Burton
Callahan
Cannon
Cantor
Cooksey
Crane
Dooley
Everett
Fattah
Hoekstra
Hooley
Istook
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
McHugh
Millender-McDonald

[[Page H2090]]

Murtha
Oxley
Riley
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Stenholm
Sullivan
Taylor (NC)
Thompson (MS)
Traficant
Wamp
Young (FL)

{time} 1653

Mr. WELLER changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
Ms. KILPATRICK and Mr. MORAN of Virginia changed their vote from
``no'' to ``present.''
Mr. MOLLOHAN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``present.''
So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were
suspended and the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. DOOLEY of California. Mr. Speaker, due to district business, I
was unable to cast a vote for H. Res. 392 to express solidarity with
Israel in its fight against terrorism. Had I been present for the vote,
I would have voted ``aye.''

____________________