[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 57 (Wednesday, May 8, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H2214-H2220]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RESULTS OF CODEL TO ISRAEL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, this weekend three of my colleagues and I
traveled to the State of Israel. We had several purposes for the visit.
One was a show of solidarity with the Israeli people in terms of what
has been going on. We visited a number of victims of terrorist acts,
including American citizens, spent time with some families who had lost
loved ones, children, 5-year-olds, 12-year-olds, 15-year-olds, again a
number of them American citizens. We met with the Prime Minister, the
Foreign Minister, terrorism experts, the head of intelligence for the
Israeli Army, but I think probably the most dramatic part of our visit
was a review of a very small collection of arms that was captured
during the recent Israeli incursion.
One thing that American television press has not given, I think, the
American people any sense of is the amount and the type of weapons that
the Israelis have seized over the last several weeks during their
incursion. It is a staggering amount. It was an amount that if it were
placed in this Chamber from floor to ceiling would more than fill this
Chamber. The weapons are extensive, mortars, sniper rifles, night
vision glasses, machine guns, weapons totally outlawed by the Oslo
agreements.
But I have a picture here which in some ways is the most disturbing
of any of the weapons, if they can be called weapons, that we saw and
that have been captured in the incursion. This is a suicide or a murder
belt, one of several that we saw and touched and examined. The belt
itself is not a makeshift belt. It is a manufactured item. It is
clearly manufactured with a certain degree of technology in the sense
that it is well-sewn and PVC piping, as you can see, that is stuck
inside of a vest. That was one version. There are other versions. But I
think the
[[Page H2215]]
point of looking at them and the impact is this belt and the weapons
that I described, and I will show some pictures of some of the other
weapons that we saw, this belt was clearly not made to be put in a
museum. This belt had one purpose, and that purpose was to kill
innocent people.
In fact, of the belts that we saw, had those belts not been captured,
I think what is clear is that their intended use would have occurred.
And if for no other reason than stopping the use of one of those murder
weapons, the Israeli incursion is justified.
I mentioned the belt again because I think one of the things that the
American press has not done enough of is tell this story. These are
mortars found, again weapons outlawed under Oslo, weapons that have no
use but offensive weapons against Israelis, found in a number of
different locations throughout the West Bank, in Ramallah and Jenin,
Bethlehem.
Again I am just going to go through some of these because these are
pictures that have not been on American television up to this point.
Besides the weapons themselves, the ammunition, just a small sample
of the ammunition from M-16s, from machine guns. In fact, one of the
sickest things that we saw was a number of buckshot bullets that we
were told the purpose of them, and there is evidence because of the
forensic evidence of suicide or murder bombings, is that the buckshot
is actually taken out and the little pellets, the ball bearings are
then implanted in C-4 to make the weapons more dangerous.
Again, these are assault rifles, which also are illegal under the
Oslo agreement.
These are machine guns and mortars.
These are rifles that have been modified for the most horrific use.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Hoeffel), who has taken a leadership role on this issue and shared the
experience of a witness in terms of the weapons.
Mr. HOEFFEL. I thank the gentleman for yielding and want to
compliment the gentleman from Florida for his leadership in standing up
for Israel and the people of Israel and for helping to organize and
really being the guiding light beyond the trip that four Members of
Congress took to Israel this past weekend. I was pleased to join that
trip led by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) and honored to be here tonight to
share some of the findings that we had.
We designed this trip, Mr. Speaker, to express our solidarity with
the people of Israel and the government of Israel in the face of the
war of terror that has faced the people of Israel over these last few
months and even over these last few decades.
{time} 1645
What has happened recently has been horrible and is unacceptable, and
the act of terror yesterday is a reminder of how difficult the
situation is and how the people of Israel face the uncertainty every
day, whether they will face this kind of terror, whether they will be
able to go shopping, whether they will be able to stand at a bus stop,
whether they will be able to socialize with friends and family in
safety. Too many times recently the answer has been that they cannot do
that safely.
We feel very strongly that the terror that has faced Israel must be
firmly opposed. We heard on our trip from Prime Minister Sharon that
there can be no compromise with terror. President Bush has said that
there should be zero tolerance for terror. All four of us, and I am
sure that the whole Congress, agrees with both of those statements from
those two leaders.
I know those of us on the trip feel that there cannot be a Yasar
Arafat exemption to the ``no tolerance for terror'' rule. We need to
determine what we can do as a Nation to help Israel deal with this
challenge and help her in her undeniable right to defend herself
against acts of terror and to make sure that we do not set artificial
limits or restraints upon her legitimate right of self-defense.
Mr. Speaker, let me yield back to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Deutsch). I know that he has other photographs of some of the illegal
weapons that we inspected, all of which were in violation of the Oslo
Agreements.
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, before the gentleman yields back, I know
the gentleman has some very strong words, and the first picture I had
up was the murder belts that we reviewed. If the gentleman could just
describe them in his own words, I think that is helpful to people.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to do so. I must say that
I have never seen a more evil thing than the suicide bombing vest that
we inspected as part of the seized weapons and munitions that the
Palestinians have stored illegally in the West Bank. The vest that we
inspected from a distance looks innocuous. It is a plain gray, down-
filled vest. Close inspection indicated that it was manufactured in
China with a Western logo. It is called the Masters Company and the
Masters name is on the vest, obviously intended for a Western audience.
But inside the vest, a webbing has been sown and straps that are
designed to hold small pieces of PCV piping, tubing; and the experts
informed us that inside of those tubes, the suicide bombers place their
C-4 explosives and a collection of ball bearings. So when the explosion
occurs, it kills the suicide bomber, the explosive force kills and
maims people around the bomber, and the ball bearings just shred the
people that are in the vicinity of the bomber.
Our delegation met with a former constituent of mine who is now a
resident of Israel who was the victim of one of these bombings. Her
name is Gila Weiss. She was stepping onto a bus at the Jewish market in
Jerusalem when a suicide bomber stepped off and the vest detonated,
killing six people, wounding 40, including Gila Weiss. Now, her
devastating injuries are just appalling; but the doctors are confident
that she will have a recovery and hopefully regain all of her eyesight
that has been threatened by this explosive blast. She is pockmarked
with shrapnel marks, but they have all been removed and the doctors
believe she will heal well.
The most encouraging thing about this was her spirit, Mr. Speaker.
Her father, my constituent, flew over when they learned, her parents
learned of her injuries and asked her in the hospital, ``Honey, do you
think now it is time for you to come home?'' And this brave woman
responded ``Daddy, I am home.'' And that is the spirit of confidence
and resolve that our delegation found throughout Israel. It is because
of that spirit that I am confident that the State of Israel will
continue to exist and to thrive, and I look forward to giving my full
support to that.
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
Before I yield to our next speaker, what I would like to do is show a
couple of other pictures that have not been in the American press. I
talked about the weapons seized in the incursions over the last couple
of weeks. There is a very dramatic incident which, unfortunately, the
incident was reported, but not the scope I think accurately, and that
is the ship Karine A, which Israeli commandos seized. We have read
about it, but to view it and really spend at least an hour and a half
looking at the weapons and understanding what they were and the actual
operation was very significant.
These weapons were about $20 million worth of weapons from Iran. They
were basically off the factory, off the factory, literally off the
factory, bated with serial numbers and dates. First of all, 90 percent
of the weapons were outside of the Oslo Agreement, maybe 95. They were
weapons not for a police force, but for an army. Beyond mortars. In
fact, they included rockets with explosive charges tied to those
rockets. The equivalent of American TOW missiles, which are devices
used to attack tanks, to be able to steer the tanks after they have
been shot, sophisticated tank mines that were made out of plastic so
they could not be detected by metal detectors. This is a picture of
just some of the mortars. Again, if one was to fill, it would be about
half of this room, the amount of weapons that were on that ship. One of
the most disturbing things, and again, the Karine A incident, our
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has publicly talked about the direct
connection with Chairman Arafat in terms of purchasing those weapons
and being involved in the shipping of those weapons. Effectively at
this point, Chairman Arafat does not deny that he tried to get the
weapons in. At this point it
[[Page H2216]]
is not a debatable point about his personal involvement in bringing in
just these extensive, very extensive weapons from Iran.
But one of the other pictures which just gives us a sense of what
this whole operation, the Karine A, was about, this is one of the
containers that all of the weapons were in. All of the weapons on the
ship were placed in some very sophisticated water-tight containers. In
fact, some of the weapons were modified, some of the larger mortars, or
mortar launchers were actually modified so that they could actually fit
inside of those containers which are very sophisticated containers.
Just a part of the sophistication, which we can see sort of on top, is
there was a part of the container that actually had a balance between
air pressure and water to literally place the containers at a certain
depth in the Mediterranean Sea.
I mean, this is a well thought-out military action. In fact, there
were buoys with each of the containers so that they could be picked up
by Palestinian Authority operatives in the Mediterranean Sea. It is a
sense of the scope of what the Israelis are facing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield now to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence),
who I have listened to his words and I do not believe there is a
Member, of the 435 Members in this Chamber, who has spoken more
passionately and more effectively about the issues that America and
Israel are facing in the Middle East, or who has been stronger and more
forceful with his words.
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I am
very humbled by his words; and I am confident that they are overly
generous. If anyone that might be looking in, Mr. Speaker, is paying
attention at all, one would observe that Democrats and Republicans,
liberals and conservatives, as we did in the resolution last week, are
truly united in this institution in our belief in the preservation of
the dream of Israel and our prayer for peace in the region.
I pray, Mr. Speaker, for the peace of Jerusalem almost every day. I
pray for the peace not just of the Jewish people of Jerusalem, but for
the Christians and the Muslims and the people who profess no particular
religious beliefs. It is against that backdrop that I grieve with my
colleagues today over the most recent loss of human life.
I think of the time of hope out of which we come to this place, Mr.
Speaker. We come from several weeks where suicide bombings had come to
an end, the efforts on the part of the Israeli military to rend asunder
those who would use terrorist violence, who would use teenagers with
bombs strapped around their chests as walking human weapons, targeting
young families on the streets of Israel. We had seen them on the run,
Mr. Speaker. We had seen evidence of the success of the Israeli
military in their war on terrorism in the region.
Then we moved, with some U.S. pressure and encouragement, into a
posture where the head of the Palestinian Authority was allowed to
leave his compound in Ramallah just a matter of days ago, the Prime
Minister of Israel comes to the United States, and against this
backdrop of hope, virtually as Prime Minister Sharon sits in the Oval
Office, more innocent lives are lost. Over a dozen dead, dozens injured
in two separate terrorist attacks.
Appropriately, the Prime Minister of Israel ended all discussions of
the peace plan that he brought to our shores and has returned to see to
it that his people might not be made the subject of blackmail.
So we rise today in the latest of a series of Special Orders on this
floor, Mr. Speaker, to state facts for what they truly are. Let us
bring a few facts, if we can, into the record.
First and foremost, with regard to the role of the United Nations,
let us understand, as Americans, as people who are committed since the
inception of Israel's return to her historic homeland in 1948, that we
are a nation committed to the territorial integrity and preservation of
the Jewish State of Israel, that the United Nations is not similarly
motivated, Mr. Speaker. That in fact, there is extraordinary evidence
of a double standard by the United Nations. Why, Mr. Speaker, I would
ask rhetorically do we have no fact-finding missions investigating
massacres performed by Palestinian extremists? Yet, there is talk in
the United Nations of an investigation into the so-called Jenin
massacre, which, according to the Boston Globe, has already been
determined to have virtually been a hoax. According to the Boston
Globe, the Palestinian Authority's allegations are crumbling under the
weight of eye witness accounts from Palestinian fighters who
participated in the battle and camp residents who remained in their
homes until the final hours of fighting, all told journalists that they
were allowed to surrender and evacuate.
{time} 1700
Mr. Speaker, there has been no massacre in Jenin, and yet the United
Nations continues to pursue its one-sided policies.
Fact number one: The solution lies not in the United States.
Fact number two: Let us make no mistake about it, as there are those
even in our own country who would call on concessions with regard to
the 13 Palestinian militants currently held within the Church of the
Nativity, let us have a fact on the table, Mr. Speaker. No other
country will accept these 13 Palestinian militants. Yet many in our own
State Department would have Israel sit down at the table of negotiating
and trust with them.
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I truly believe that the recent attacks
demonstrate that Israel's efforts in the war on terrorism are
incomplete; that, sadly, because of pressure from the United States of
America, it appears as though, based on the two suicide attacks of
recent days, that we have asked our ally to stop a war before it was
over.
So I rise today with my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Deutsch), and others who we will hear from to say that America must
allow Israel to complete this operation. We must allow Israel to remove
the terrorist elements from their proximity. We are in the same
position. We are taking our war against terrorism to the terrorists,
and Israel must be allowed to pursue the terrorists in her midst.
As I said in the beginning, Mr. Speaker, I pray for the peace of
Jerusalem. I ask, as did the Psalmist, that those who love God would be
secure, that there would be peace within her walls, security within her
citadels. As the Psalmist goes on to write, ``For the sake of my
brothers and friends, I will say, peace be within you.''
I rise today as a Christian conservative Member of this institution.
I rise to speak humbly on behalf of, Mr. Speaker, millions of my
brothers in the Christian faith, and sisters, who share the passion
that my colleague associated with me does.
They are people who on Sunday morning and Sunday night and Wednesday
night fill the pews of little buckboard churches that dot the landscape
of districts just like mine in the heartland of America, and they are
people who have a passion for the dream that is Israel.
So let there be no mistake to those who would observe among our
colleagues and to the wider world that this is a Congress that is
united across the lines of geography, across the lines of partisanship,
and even across the lines of faith to come alongside our partner, our
ally, and our friend in her darkest hour.
Mr. DEUTSCH. Again, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of the
gentleman from Indiana. I really have learned a lot from the several
statements he has made over the last couple of weeks.
Those of us who left to go on this trip literally left as soon as we
took the vote last Thursday in support of Israel, in solidarity with
Israel, but also specifically in understanding what the Israeli
government is doing in terms of its military operation.
As the gentleman will recall, and as people watching might very well
recall, it was a debate in this Chamber. It was an overwhelming
support. Over 90 percent or about 90 percent of the Members that voted,
voted in support of that effort.
I can tell the Members a couple of things. First off, we delivered
copies of that resolution to victims in hospitals, to the Prime
Minister, to families who had lost loved ones. I can tell Members that
it meant a great deal to them that they are not alone, that there is a
connection between the United States and
[[Page H2217]]
the people of the United States and the people of Israel; that we
should do as much as we can do to make that real, because
unfortunately, they do feel alone.
I sat through really the entire debate last Thursday, and again,
generally we do not sit through entire debates, but I wanted to hear my
colleagues who were speaking against the resolution. It was a
disturbing afternoon.
One of the things that we have talked about is I would welcome any of
my colleagues in a discourse, because as the gentleman knows, our
debates are not really debates, they are statements. They are very
difficult. In this setting we can have discourse. I would hope that any
of those colleagues would join us this evening and enter into a
discourse about some of the statements that they made.
I would also offer to those colleagues, and we have done it before in
this Chamber, an Oxford-style debate for them in a discourse way to try
to defend some of those positions. Some of those positions, again, I
found disturbing, shocking, and ignorant.
I will mention one, and there is no reason to mention a Member's
name. One of the Members in this Chamber actually stood at this podium
and put up two pictures of two young girls, a young girl who was a
suicide bomber about 19 years old and a young girl who was killed by
that suicide bomber.
We saw the supermarket where that incident occurred. I cannot think
of many sicker, more immoral comparisons than was delivered right at
this podium less than a week ago. I would ask my colleague just to
share thoughts that he had during that debate, as well.
Mr. PENCE. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, I
want to congratulate the gentleman and my other colleagues who were
able to make the trip over the weekend to Israel. I am very moved, as I
am sure anyone is that is watching, to hear that the pronouncements of
this institution were a comfort to people who are suffering the loss of
family members.
I share the gentleman's frustration with what we can only describe as
the moral equivalency that many in this country and some in this
institution ascribe to this conflict, to either side in this conflict.
It is born, in fairness to our colleague who posted the pictures, that
juxtaposition first appeared to me on the cover of a prominent American
magazine. Who would ever have conceived that a sympathetic display of
the photograph of a murderer and the girl she murdered would be
presented on the cover of an American magazine as two victims of the
conflict in the Middle East? It was an outrage to me. I have no doubt
that our colleague who used that display was prompted by that same
national magazine.
But it does, it seems to me, belie some of the moral confusion in the
national media which has infected some in this institution. But I must
tell the Members, as a friend and colleague, I was deeply heartened by
what I heard in that debate, taking it in here and over the television
air waves as I did in my office that day, by the way that so many of
our colleagues seemed, against an avalanche of seemingly one-sided
international media, to be still understanding how the hearts of the
American people resonate for Israel; and, as the gentleman has said
many times on this floor, about the one-to-one comparison between what
Israel is doing in the West bank and what the United States is doing in
the mountains of southeastern Afghanistan, and perhaps, as we speak, in
northern Pakistan, that it is a one-to-one comparison. We are doing the
same thing.
As our President stood at this podium days after September 11 and
pronounced, ``You are either with the terrorists or you are with us,''
Israel is the one Nation on Earth, it seems to me, that has taken up
the mantle and joined us in the battle against terrorism.
So I share the gentleman's frustration with many of our colleagues. I
hope those that are with us listening in in their offices on this late
afternoon who have a different view will join us for a colloquy of
sorts.
I also want to extol the Members in both parties in this institution
who were willing to rise against media criticism and distortions and
stand and add their names to that resolution that the gentleman so
movingly says was a comfort to families.
Mr. DEUTSCH. I would also mention, Mr. Speaker, just in terms of the
discourse that occurred, on more than one occasion last Thursday people
mentioned the Israeli occupation, almost inferring that it was a
justification for acts of violence. Obviously, it could never be a
justification for the killing of innocents. The last incident before
this one that occurred was literally a 5-year-old girl was shot,
murdered, hiding underneath her bed.
I think one of the facts that are important, that people should
understand, is that the Israeli government offered to end the
occupation. That is what the Camp David Accord was about, where the
Israeli government effectively offered to give back 98 percent of the
West Bank and Gaza, offered to end the occupation. So it is this
demented sort of perspective that if the occupation causes frustration
and violence, well, the Israeli government was willing to end the
occupation, so then why did they not accept it? It ends up bringing
some of those issues in.
I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) has some very
important statements, but I wanted to give the gentleman from
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) an opportunity to talk,
because he was with some of those people who we passed on that
resolution to. If he could just describe the interaction, knowing that
the United States Congress had passed that resolution, and literally
giving it to people, if he can share in his own words.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Hoeffel).
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to. I thank the gentleman
for yielding to me.
The people we met in Israel on the trip this past weekend all knew
about the resolution that the House had passed the day before. It was a
remarkable demonstration to me of how much our actions here in the
House are followed by the citizens and the government of Israel.
Everyone we met with, from Prime Minister Sharon, Foreign Minister
Peres, Security Minister Landau, to the Mayor of Jerusalem, to Mikeli
the taxicab driver, all knew and all appreciated the work that was done
here last Thursday on a bipartisan basis by passing that resolution
expressing solidarity with Israel and denouncing the terror.
So I thank the gentleman for the opportunity just to once more say
that what happens here is followed in Israel. They appreciated the
solidarity that we expressed, and there was a strong feeling of
appreciation for what we did.
Mr. DEUTSCH. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner), who
I know over the weekend wanted to join us, but in fact had activities
in his own community showing solidarity and support for the State of
Israel, and has worked as hard as any Member in this Chamber for peace
in the Middle East.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for his
statements today and for that kind compliment, and also for organizing
these opportunities. We frequently in the House of Representatives are
reduced to sometimes 2- or 3- or 5-minute debates on large global
issues. This is now an opportunity, and it is the third or fourth time
we have gathered to have kind of a reasonable discussion and back and
forth about what are essentially very complex issues.
I want to also offer my thanks to the gentleman from Indiana who
spoke earlier. We also have a tendency sometimes in politics,
particularly in this age of conflict debate, to be overly morally
certain about our position on things. Sometimes we have debates about
obscure tax policy or telecommunications policy, and sometimes we go at
it on the floor of this Congress as if there is no doubt in our mind
with absolute certainty that our position is correct.
One thing that I would hope we would be able to agree upon is there
is no moral underpinning for sending one's child out to go to a pool
hall and then have them blown to bits by a suicide bomber. Those 16
young people who were killed in the latest homicide bombing, what crime
did they commit?
[[Page H2218]]
What political role did they occupy? What was it that their killing
accomplished? What form of political debate is it that was being
engaged in when they were blown to bits while Prime Minister Sharon was
visiting here in the United States?
There is no moral justification for it. There are no political ends
that they seek to get that justifies that type of horror. I would agree
with what the gentleman said, the gentleman from Florida. The idea that
some have embraced or even rationalized that type of activity, saying
it is a function of a political discussion or a political debate,
however feverishly pitched it might be, over who controls a given piece
of real estate in the Middle East, these are 16 families that are going
to be sitting down to dinner tonight with their young child missing
from the table, blown to bits by a suicide bomber.
In that context that 350 of our colleagues, Democrats and Republicans
from all parts of the country rallying last week to the cause of the
U.S.'s support for Israel, and it was led, frankly, by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel), there are very few things we agree
upon in those large numbers. But among those who argued against, there
were certain myths that seem to have been repeated on this floor again
and again, and in some cases they were responded to eloquently, and
sometimes they were kind of left out there in the air.
One of them is the myth that somehow Israel has to just give peace a
chance, that they have not sufficiently offered opportunities for peace
to take hold in the area. I think, and I have said before here, we can
argue that Israel has tried every strategy. They tried the couple of
yards at a time, trying to get to the first down marker. They tried the
Oslo process, started in 1993, step-by-step, giving and conceding more
to the Palestinians in terms of control of territory.
At this time, 97 percent of the territories are under Palestinian
control as a result of the Oslo process. Border checkpoints had been
eased as a result of the Oslo process.
{time} 1715
Well, that three yards and a cloud of dust strategy was tried. What
was the result? More violence; no concessions when it came to things
like not teaching young people in the Palestine territories to hate
Israel; to removing reference in their textbooks referring to Israel
and Jews as evil entities. So the Oslo process was tried by the
Israelis and rejected in large measure by the Palestinians.
Then Camp David, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch)
mentions. That to me was kind of like the Hail Mary pass. Well, let us
see what will happen if we try giving them everything they ask for.
Well, that was not only rejected, but it was met with no counteroffer
on the part of the Palestinians and the largest outburst of violence
called the Second Intifada.
Well, what do we have left? Now we have plans to get to plans to get
to plans. And those, too, Israel has embraced and the Palestinians have
not. We had the Mitchell Plan, very tough for Israel, telling them to
withdraw from settlements of areas that many people believe in their
heart of hearts are part of Israel proper. Israel accepted the Mitchell
Plan; the Palestinians refused.
Then you have the Tennant Plan to get you to the Mitchell Plan.
Again, it requires very tough things of Israel. Israel said okay, we
accept it. It was CIA Director Tennant here from the United States,
sent on behalf of our government, who negotiated this plan. The
Palestinians said no to that. We even had the Chaney Plan to get you to
the Tennant Plan to get you to the Mitchell Plan. Even this level of
incrementalism Israel chose to accept. The Palestinians said no because
they refused to do thing one, which was to stop the violence, stop it
for a period of time, allow negotiations to take place.
So the first myth that came up in the debate on the floor was that
Israel needs to just give peace a chance and we in the United States
need to step back, not be as supportive of Israel, because she has not.
Clearly a myth.
The second myth that has emerged again and again in this debate and
it has seeped into the mainstream media is that the problems there are
a product of Prime Minister Sharon's intractability; that if it only
was not Sharon and the way he behaves in his bellicose manner, maybe we
would not have all of these problems.
Well, I would make two points about that. One is the Intifada that
has started this violence, that has led to 76 suicide attacks since
October of 2000, started under Prime Minister Barak. Frankly, he was in
for 4 months while this violence was ratcheted up and ratcheted up and
ratcheted up. No one could argue that Prime Minister Barak was so anti-
Palestinian, bellicose and confrontational. He actually lost his prime
ministership because he was too generous in what he was offering the
Palestinians. Yet that is conveniently ignored by opponents of Israel
today who want to lay this all at the feet of Ariel Sharon, with the
simplistic explanation of what is going on.
Let us not forget something else. Virtually every corner of Israeli
political life today has articulated support for Prime Minister
Sharon's efforts to weed out terrorism wherever it can be found,
essentially has articulated support for the Bush doctrine, Israeli
style. So the myth that this is a Sharon-created problem is just that,
a myth.
A third myth that was repeated again and again, and I heard it last
night on the news again, is that the Israelis have used excessive force
on the face of the onslaught of terrorism.
We have as of this morning dropped one bomb for every member of the
Taliban in Tora Bora. We have unleashed a record number of armaments in
that area. We do so because we know how important it is to do whatever
is necessary to root out the Taliban, to root out bin Laden and to root
out his henchmen.
The Israelis have made a different decision. They are not flying over
the Palestinian territories, going to Ramallah and saying there is 44
of these suicide bombers coming from Ramallah, we are going to level
Ramallah. They are going house to house, down dark alleys, and making a
conscious decision to increase the number of casualties.
Excessive force? If the Israelis really wanted to root this out in a
way that we have done it in Tora Bora, they would do it from afar. But
they will not do that. It is not the way they are as a people and it is
not the way they choose to deal with the Palestinians as a people
either.
So what has happened? Israelis going door to door with pictures of
wanted terrorists, knocking on the door, trying to find them, and they
are getting killed as a result. Far from excessive force. The exact
opposite. Probably the most moral execution of a war you can possibly
imagine.
And the standoff that goes on today at the Church of the Nativity.
Can you imagine, just imagine for a moment, first of all, the utter
contempt of the terrorists to seek refuge in such a holy place. But can
you imagine any other country with 13 assassins, suicide bombers,
people who have done harm, can you imagine for a moment one of the evil
men that attacked my city of New York, imagine if we knew one of them
was in a local church? Would we encircle it and wait and wait and wait
until they came out, out of respect for that church? Probably not. No
country would do that perhaps except for Israel. Why? Because Israel
has been the caretaker of the religious crossroads of the world for its
entire 44 years with the utmost respect. Anyone who visits Israel can
attest to that.
If you look at the various places, an entire government commission
was created, a government agency was created just for the purposes of
protecting and ensuring the health and security of non-Jewish holy
sites in the Holy Land because that is the way Israel chooses to do it.
So this idea that excessive force has been used is another myth.
And the final myth, and this is the one that perhaps is a favorite of
those in the media, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch)
referenced it earlier, is the notion that we have to create an
environment that the moderate Arab states can help us forge. Where is
this moderate Arab state? Is it Iran, who tried to export 50 tons, I
believe is the number, of armaments that cannot only be used against
Israeli citizens, ships and planes, but just as easily against a United
States ship or plane or people? Is that our moderate friend?
[[Page H2219]]
How about the Saudis? The Jerry Lewis of fundraising for suicide
bombers. Are they the moderates that produced 15 of the 19 suicide
bombers? Are these the people that came to the United States to meet
with our President of the United States and engage in a front page New
York Times lecture about our moral responsibility? This is the country,
this totalitarian regime that is run by a few hundred princes and
potentates?
Who are these moderates? Maybe it is Syria, Hafez Assad, the new head
of Syria? He is an ophthalmologist or an orthopedist or an
orthodontist. I do not know what he is. He was educated at the Sorbonne
so we start to say maybe he is going to be the moderate face of the
Middle East. What does he do? He turns over his government in whole, in
toto, to Hezbollah which continues on the other front that Israel has,
their northern front, continues to use Lebanon as a launching place for
more terrorism.
This is another myth that the moderate Arab states will rise up. I
will tell you who is going to rise up. The people of the Palestinian
territories will rise up and say what the Egyptians said, what the
Jordanians have said, and what other people who have sought to make
peace have said.
In every case where someone said to Israel, here is our hand of
peace, there has been peace. The Egyptians decided through the heroism
of Anwar Sadat, maybe we should learn to get along, live together.
Peace did not take that long to do.
King Hussein of Jordan made the same decision. The moment that it
comes that the Palestinian peoples choose through a nonviolent, through
negotiations that they want a homeland, that they want an economy that
is not in rubbles, that they want to peacefully co-exist with Israel, I
can tell you that it will happen in weeks.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) correctly points out the
occupation is hardly even an issue any more. The Israeli people, the
Israeli government say we will negotiate an end to the occupation in
exchange for peaceful co-existence.
Let us not forget that in the final analysis, Israel is ringed by
Arab nations who fundamentally like the idea that the Palestinian
people are waging a war against Israel. They are a surrogate army. It
is the Palestinian people themselves that have to make the decision.
They say we no longer want leadership that turns over our faith to
Hamas to go blow up children at a pool hall. We no longer want to turn
over our faith to Yasir Arafat who says no to an offer of everything
simply because he wants to continue to negotiate or because he does not
want Israel's right to exist.
When the Palestinian people rise up and say, you know, my little 5-
year-old girl should not be seeing cartoons on Palestinian terrorism
saying put down your books, put down your toys and pick up your guns,
when the Palestinian people decide they are not going to go to
protests, holding their 5, 6-year-old boys and girls on their shoulder
with mock suicide bombs around their waists, there will be peace. Until
then it is the United States supporting a peaceful country of Israel
who is trying desperately to do what we have been doing since September
11; desperately trying to survive, trying to have an environment where
they are not afraid to send their kids to school, not afraid to send
them out for a slice of pizza, not afraid to send them out to a pool
hall.
I would ask my colleagues how they would feel in their town and
neighborhoods and cities all across this country if they did not feel
comfortable that they could send their child out for a slice of pizza
without knowing whether they would be blown up by some person wearing
dynamite laced with nails, ball bearings and hexagonal nuts. That is
what Israel confronts.
We in this Congress in a magnitude that is rarely seen around here,
350-some-odd votes, said we in the United States understand what Israel
confronts, and we stand shoulder to shoulder with them.
Mr. DEUTSCH. The gentleman had so many incredible insights in that
statement. I would like to really follow up on a couple of them.
One, the difference between Anwar Sadat and Yasser Arafat. Anwar
Sadat not only came to Jerusalem as a peacemaker, but got on Egyptian
television and told his people why it was in their interest to have
peace with Israel, and basically led them and educated them about that.
Yasser Arafat, I am going to read this quote that he basically said
today, right now. This is the quote. ``But we ask Allah to grant us
martyrdom. To Jerusalem we march, martyrs by the million.''
This is the English translation from al Jazeera, but the word martyr
is shaheed. And the true translation that every Palestinian understands
by that word is suicide bomber. Literally suicide bomber. It is the
equivalent of what we would say kamikaze, and we know what a kamikaze
means. Shaheed, the Palestinians know what it means. So he said to
Jerusalem we march. Suicide bombers by the millions. To Jerusalem we
march. Suicide bombers by the millions.
When Yasser Arafat left his compound on May 3, it really is not
martyrs in the millions, the true translation as Palestinians said the
words and understand the words, suicide bombers in the millions.
This is just another comment. Let me see if I can find it.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, while the gentleman is looking for that, if
I could ask the gentleman to yield for a moment. One of the things that
is important is we frequently listen to what Mr. Arafat says to Western
television in English, and then you go read what he says to his own
people in Arabic, and it is a world of difference. You can hold a press
conference in the United States for CNN saying this is a terrible thing
that has happened, and then, as you pointed out, he turns and says in
Arabic something entirely different.
Mr. DEUTSCH. This is from the New York Times, April 15. This is from
Chairman Arafat's wife. And I think it is so strange to us that a
mother could say this, but this is what Yasser Arafat and his wife are
teaching.
``If she had a son, there would be no greater honor than to sacrifice
him for the Palestinian cause. `Would you expect me or my children to
be less patriotic and more eager to live than my countrymen and their
father, we who are seeking martyrdom?' '' And, again, martyrdom means
being a suicide bomber, a mother of a leader of a group. And I question
whether or not he is a leader because one of the things that is
interesting in your comments and one of the things of visiting and
talking to people in Israel, is that as evil and as awful and as
horrific as Yasser Arafat has been to Israelis, he has been as bad to
his own people. They have indiscriminately killed Palestinians. They
have destroyed an economy. There is no freedom. There is fear. The
demolishment. And it is a people that does have a future. But it does
not have a future with Yasser Arafat.
One of the other things, and again, the gentleman went through a
number of points that I hopefully will be able to find all the
corresponding charts. I think I have it.
This is our friends, the Saudis. One of the things about the Israeli
incursion was that not only did they find this incredible stash of
weapons, but an incredible sort of stash of documents, some of which
have been released publicly at this point in time. And unfortunately,
again, it is an issue where the press really has not, I think, talked
about them specifically. And I welcome people trying to understand and
literally read the documents.
Here is the ad that was put in a Palestinian newspaper asking for
people because the Saudi committee for support of the Intifada was
giving the equivalent of 5,000 American dollars per family, per suicide
bomber. And literally an ad in the Palestinian newspaper, Alhayat Al
Jadideh, and literally just asking them to come to a certain location
for information and a number of beneficiaries and to come and sign up,
prove that you are a suicide bomber and you will get $5,000 from the
Saudis.
{time} 1730
Saudi Committee for the Support of the Intifada, which the interior
minister of the Saudi government is the head of that committee.
Now, the Saudi government then sent a letter to that particular
organization and the letter says, ``I remind you that the house rules
of the Saudi Committee for the Support of the Intifada prohibits
publication of the name of the
[[Page H2220]]
committee.'' So they are not allowed to publicize the fact that the
Saudis are paying for it.
Included in the documents are a list of suicide bombers, literally a
list which people at this point is not on the Internet, but is
available in the public domain, that the Saudi government pay the
$5,000 American literally to people who were suicide bombers.
So I agree with the gentleman completely. Is that moderates? Is that
who we can expect? The one mistake I think in terms of the war on
terrorism that the administration is making is this attempt to make
something that is not. I think the proofs are the facts that the Saudis
unfortunately are really not our allies in this war against global
terrorism by their actions and by their specific deeds.
What I would like to do quickly in the last minutes is really just
put up on the easel again some of the extensive evidence tying Chairman
Arafat specifically to the terrorist actions. There has been an attempt
by the President to also make a Yasar Arafat exemption to the war on
terrorism, and it is a sad and, I think, tragic mistake of the
administration.
The facts are the facts. The truth is the truth. These are one of
several documents. At this point the Palestinian authorities are no
longer inferring, as originally they did, that the documents are
hoaxes. These were found by soldiers in the hard drives of Arafat's
compound; and in fact, I spoke with the parents of a soldier who, in
fact, was one of the soldiers that did, that was killed, and in the
interim, the parents before, because it was in a different incursion,
he was in Ramallah, he ended up being killed in Jenin, actually called
his parents and explained to them what he did and by his own words told
me what their son told him. In fact, he actually got these specific
documents and the young man, 20-year-old young man, that died.
This particular document, which at this point again, there is no
question about its authenticity. It is signed by Chairman Arafat, his
signature, and specifically, it is a request by a senior Fatah activist
in the West Bank for $2,500 for three known terrorists, terrorists that
were on the Israeli's most wanted list. In fact, the Israelis were
assassinated because of specific direct involvement with terrorism, and
Chairman Arafat signs and approves those payments.
He does the same in this chart for a list of 12 known terrorists and
again his signature, which at this point is no longer refuted in terms
of his direct involvement in terms of terrorist acts.
In some ways this is one of the most disturbing documents found. It
is a list of expenditures by Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a martyr group, a
list of their specific needs; and as incredible as it is, we meet every
week five to nine, explosive targets. The squads in the various areas,
five to nine explosive charges for suicide bombs, for murder bombers,
written by Al Aqsa, to the Palestinian Authority, in their office was
found and the calculation of how much they were going to pay them.
It is just not credible that they were not involved in direct
bombings, suicide bombings.
Here is a copy of minutes of a meeting from March 24, 2002, of the
Palestinian Authority. Hamas members were there at the time. So again
it is not credible to say that Chairman Arafat obviously was at this
meeting, but specifically talking about minutes from the meeting,
talking about the decisions of where to bomb and why it was not a good
time to bomb because or where outside the green line or inside the
green line. General Zinni was there.
I am going to close because our hour is just about up, and there are
more things that I can mention or show, but I think that in closing
Israel's war is America's war. Israel does not want to be in Bethlehem
or Nablus or Jenin anymore than America wants to be in Afghanistan.
They are there because they have to be there. They have no choice.
I will not show a chart of it, but Israel is about \1/60\th the size
of the United States in population. When 50 Israelis are killed, it is
the equivalent of 9-11. So just yesterday it was almost the equivalent
of one-third of 9-11. We know how America responded on 9-11, as we
should and as we did and as we are doing. We cannot ask anything less
of the Israelis.
____________________