[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 24023-24038]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



    EXPRESSING SOLIDARITY WITH ISRAEL IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 280) expressing solidarity with 
Israel in the fight against terrorism.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 280

       Whereas 26 innocent people in Israel were murdered in cold 
     blood and at least 175 wounded by Palestinian terrorists, all 
     within 14 hours, during the weekend of December 1-2, 2001;

[[Page 24024]]

       Whereas this is the equivalent, on a proportional basis, of 
     1,200 American deaths and 8,000 wounded;
       Whereas United States Middle East envoy Anthony Zinni has 
     labeled the terrorism of December 1-2, 2001, ``the deepest 
     evil one can imagine'';
       Whereas this bloody weekend is part of an ongoing terror 
     campaign often targeted at youth and families and perpetrated 
     by the Islamic fundamentalist groups Hamas and Palestinian 
     Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian terrorist groups;
       Whereas President Bush declared at a joint session of 
     Congress on September 20, 2001, that ``Every nation, in every 
     region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, 
     or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any 
     nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be 
     regarded by the United States as a hostile regime''; and
       Whereas President Bush declared on December 2, 2001, that 
     ``Chairman Arafat must do everything in his power to find 
     those who murdered innocent Israelis and bring them to 
     justice'': Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That Congress--
       (1) condemns the vicious terrorist attacks resulting in the 
     death of 26 and the wounding of at least 175 innocent people 
     in Israel within 14 hours during December 1-2, 2001, and 
     extends its deepest sympathies to the Israeli nation and to 
     the families of the victims;
       (2) expresses outrage at the ongoing Palestinian terrorist 
     campaign and insists that the Palestinian Authority take all 
     steps necessary to end it;
       (3) demands, specifically, that the Palestinian Authority 
     take action immediately to--
       (A) destroy the infrastructure of Palestinian terrorist 
     groups;
       (B) pursue and arrest terrorists whose incarceration has 
     been called for by Israel; and
       (C) either--
       (i) prosecute such terrorists, provide convicted terrorists 
     with the stiffest possible punishment, and ensure that those 
     convicted remain in custody for the full duration of their 
     sentences; or
       (ii) render all arrested terrorists to the Government of 
     Israel for prosecution;
       (4) urges the President to take any and all necessary steps 
     to ensure that the Palestinian Authority takes the actions 
     described in paragraph (3), including, if necessary, 
     suspending all relations with Yasir Arafat and the 
     Palestinian Authority;
       (5) further urges the President to insist that all 
     countries harboring, materially supporting, or acquiescing in 
     the private support of Palestinian terrorist groups end all 
     such support, dismantle the infrastructure of such groups, 
     and bring all terrorists within their borders to justice;
       (6) commends the President for his strong leadership 
     against international terrorism, his forthright response to 
     this most recent outrage, and his swift action to freeze 
     additional sources of terrorist funds; and
       (7) expresses the solidarity of the United States with 
     Israel in our common struggle against the scourge of 
     terrorism.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Con. Res. 280.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lantos) in opposition to the motion to suspend the rules?
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. As a Member opposed to the motion, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) may control the 20 minutes 
reserved for opposition.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to divide my time with 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that each side be 
given an additional 10 minutes in view of the fact that we have a 
number of speakers.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. Each side, I would 
like to know what that means?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Michigan object?
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I do not. I simply reserve the right. That 
means 10 minutes more for those supporting the motion and 10 minutes 
more for the opposition?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would state that it would make the 
motion debatable for an hour evenly divided.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I do not object to that.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) will 
control 15 minutes, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) will 
control 15 minutes, and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) will 
control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).


                             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 H. Con. Res. 280, 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 myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House leadership would have met with 
Israeli Prime Minister Sharon in the United States Capitol to discuss 
the status of the peace process. Instead, he had to return home to 
Israel, and we are here on the floor of the House joining with the 
people of Israel in their grief over the losses from the horrific 
terrorist attack of the past weekend.
  As Israel buries its dead, comforts its bereaved and begins to heal 
its wounded, we send through this resolution a signal of sincere 
condolence and solidarity with the people and the government of the 
State of Israel.
  The American people also join in President Bush's forthright 
expression of support for Israel's right of self-defense. Mr. Speaker, 
yesterday the President took additional actions to cut off funding for 
terrorists, funds which originated here in the United States. Hamas is 
now understood to be a terrorist organization of global reach, even if 
that reach is mainly from Iran, Syria, or Lebanon into Israel.
  This resolution calls on Palestinian Authority Chairman Arafat to do 
what the President's spokesman said he could have done in the past, to 
really crack down on those who would deliberately murder women, 
children and men as they go about their business on the streets.
  We ask the President to act sharply against the Palestinian Authority 
if it does not heed our request. This is not an action we should rush 
to take, because the Palestinian people have chosen Chairman Arafat as 
their leader, and it is important that we maintain a relationship with 
him if at all possible. But as we do not provide aid to the Palestinian 
Authority itself, we cannot cut off assistance as a way of showing 
displeasure. A customary way of showing extreme displeasure with a 
foreign authority is to cut off our diplomatic relationship and compel 
some or all of their envoys to return home.
  It seems clear that the actions or inaction of the Palestinian 
Authority to date merit the President's taking all appropriate actions, 
which could include the cutting off of our quasi-diplomatic 
relationship should we not see some serious action on their part.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that Chairman Arafat has a historic role to 
play. He needs to lead his people by stopping the violence and 
beginning the negotiating process. He needs to do this not because we 
asked him to, not because of Israel's interest, but the interests of 
his own people. He needs to clearly convey to his people that the way 
of violence is not the way forward.
  I sincerely hope he chooses the path of peace, takes risks for peace, 
and finds a way out of his present dilemma. The United States and its 
friends can and should do all it can to help him, but the choice 
ultimately is one that he and his colleagues must make and take 
responsibility for.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 7 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in regretful opposition to the resolution. It is 
clear we have an opportunity to pass a resolution which will contribute 
in a significant way to the peace process. It is

[[Page 24025]]

very clear that we have a duty to oppose terrorism, which I have always 
done and which I continue to do. It is also equally clear that the 
United States has a long-standing commitment to the freedom and 
independence to the State of Israel, and I strongly support that 
undertaking.
  But I would note that here the resolution contributes very little to 
the accomplishment of those purposes. What this resolution does is to 
essentially set up a situation where the United States appears and in 
fact does and will be viewed by people in the area as having taken 
sides. The interests of the United States here are to bring to a halt 
terrorism and to create a lasting viable negotiated peace. That is best 
done by attacking the root causes of terrorism, not the least of which 
are the thousands or hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and others 
feel themselves to be unfairly, badly, and improperly treated. Their 
homes are destroyed. Their orchards are destroyed. Their lands are 
settled in defiance of their wishes their people are driven to poverty 
and killed. International agreements which they have made in their 
names are not being honored.
  The duty of the United States here is a very simple one, and that is 
to work for peace in the Middle East. Our single most important concern 
in that area is peace: peace for Israel, security for Israel, peace and 
security for the Palestinians, an end to the fighting, a termination of 
terrorism. How is that done? Is it done by shooting up Arafat's 
helicopters? Is it done by terror bombings of people who are committing 
suicide to kill Israelis? No. Only one way leads to this course, the 
strongest possible leadership by the United States functioning as an 
impartial honest broker between people who find little reason not to 
hate each other.
  Mr. Speaker, this will be done by a long process of negotiation in 
which the parties must come together to negotiate their differences 
under the strong leadership and guidance of the United States. This 
resolution accomplishes nothing in that end. It does nothing to move 
forward the peace process which came so close under the leadership of 
President Clinton during the last days of his administration. It does 
nothing to strengthen our friends in the area, the Governments of Egypt 
and Jordan. And it does nothing to make it possible for Mr. Arafat to 
provide the necessary leadership towards meaningful discussions. Rather 
it, and other actions leave Arafat weaker and less capable of effective 
participation in the peace process.
  The question Members have to ask is: How is it that Arafat is to be 
better disposed to move forward towards peace when his people are angry 
and when his helicopters are bombed and when his headquarters is 
threatened? The answer is, not at all. But, it goes beyond this. How is 
the peace process, or how are our concerns about peace in the area 
moved forward by weakening Arafat and by making him appear to be 
incapable of leading the Palestinian people? Or making the Palestinian 
people less willing to follow his leadership in the peace process?
  Mr. Speaker, I hold no brief here for any side, none for Mr. Arafat, 
none for the Israelis or anybody else. I think the United States has to 
look to one thing. Let us look to our principal interest. Our principal 
interest is peace in the area. How is that to be achieved? Only in one 
way and no other. There is only one country in the world that has the 
prestige and the ability to do that and the military capability to 
bring that about. When it gets down to the point, we, and we alone, 
acting as leader of other Nations also dedicated to peace have the 
capacity to do what has to be done, to bring about real meaningful and 
final negotiations to settle the problems.
  The issue here is how we bring the parties forward to begin a long 
and difficult a process. We must use the most intense pressure of the 
United States to abate and to terminate the terrible events which we 
are seeing in Israel, in Palestine, in the occupied territories in the 
Middle East. Negotiations between the parties are the only way.
  I think Members can anticipate that the terrible events which 
occurred the other day in Israel with scores of people injured and 
killed are going to be replicated again and again. Angry, frustrated, 
bitter people are going to use that method because that is the only 
method that is available to the weak.

                              {time}  1315

  Again how are we going to bring the terrible events in the Middle 
East to a halt? By seeing to it that the problems that exist between 
the Israelis and the Palestinians and the others in the area are abated 
by negotiations between them. Is this going to be easy? Of course not. 
But is there an alternative way? The answer is there is no other way 
that that could be accomplished.
  Certainly the resolution which is before us offered, by good friends 
of mine, for whom I have great respect, with, I am sure, the best of 
intentions, does not carry out the mechanisms for bringing peace and it 
does not offer us the prospects of seeing progress going forward. Nor 
does it offer this Nation the opportunity to know that we have done 
something which will abate the root causes of terrorism in that world 
which are causing deaths in the United States as well as Israel, 
Palestine, and other places. We have committed ourselves to a massive 
effort in Afghanistan, which has caused us to spend billions of dollars 
and to put at risk our military personnel.
  I support that effort, and each year I support massive funding to 
help Israelis to maintain their statehood and to deal with their 
security problems.
  This resolution is counterproductive. It does not move us forward 
towards world peace. It does not move us forward towards a resolution 
of the controversy of the differences which are major causes of 
terrorism, heartache, death and suffering, for Israelis and for Arabs 
alike, and on September 11, Americans.
  This leaves us with a large new group of people who are going to say 
the United States sides with Israel, and that this country is not 
concerned about peace in the Middle East, and not concerned about 
addressing the enormous problems which divide the people there. We thus 
ignore some of the terms most important to our national security. We 
are talking here about an area which has the potential for the next 
world war occurring. Terrorism can bring it about at any time. It could 
happen; and if it does, the results to Israel will be calamitous. Five 
million Israelis, or a few more, in a small country surrounded by 
millions of Arabs, is facing terrible risk and danger in the event that 
there is significant trouble.
  I am not sure that the United States can address any of the problems 
that we have with peace in the area easily, or that we can address the 
problems of assuring our own security. But we must. We have already 
learned the bitter anger that causes suicide bombers will kill large 
numbers of Israelis and Americans through terrorist tactics. I would 
urge my colleagues to choose a better mechanism for assuring peace in 
the area and the security of the United States, a negotiated settlement 
by the parties, driven by our leadership, and effort, with the support 
of the other peace loving Nations.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to my distinguished friend, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), for whom I have enormous 
admiration, that he has a much more spacious view of the purpose of 
this resolution. We do not pretend to have an answer to the Middle East 
conflict; and I pray that if the gentleman does, he will come forward 
with it so that peace might be moved closer in that troubled part of 
the world.
  What this resolution does is a very narrow, simple thing, and that is 
it shows solidarity with the Israeli people who were victimized on 
December 1 with an atrocity, namely the killing of 26 people, randomly, 
in a shopping mall, and the wounding of at least 175 of them, in the 
wake of what happened to our country on the 11th of September in the 
worst act of terrorism in recorded history in the memory of man.

[[Page 24026]]

  So Israel and the United States are both victims of a terrible act of 
terrorism; and in that co-victimhood we attempt to show solidarity. 
That is not a mindless thing; it is not an empty gesture. It focuses on 
this new form of war, which is beyond contempt. I think that is very 
useful and necessary.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I first want to pay tribute to the leadership of the 
chairman of the Committee on International Relations, our distinguished 
colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), in bringing this 
resolution before us.
  I should also mention, Mr. Speaker, that as we speak, a parallel 
resolution is being considered in the other body, introduced by the 
chairman and the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Affairs 
Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Hyde-Lantos resolution 
expressing solidarity with the State of Israel and the Israeli people 
in their fight against terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Israel experienced the most deadly 
eruption of Palestinian terrorist assassinations that country has seen 
in years. Some 26 utterly innocent civilians were killed, most of them 
young people, and 175 wounded, within a 14-hour period as a result of 
ruthless suicide bombs in both Jerusalem and Haifa. Once again, 
Palestinian terrorists targeted people on a bus and people in a 
shopping mall.
  We as Americans, ourselves recently victimized, fully share the 
Israelis' sense of anger, outrage, and violation. The horror of this 
past weekend was, as President Bush's Middle East envoy, General Zinni, 
stated, ``the deepest evil one can imagine.''
  Israel's casualty figures from the 14 hours of carnage are the 
equivalent on a proportional basis of 1,200 American dead and 8,000 
American wounded. The horrors of this past weekend only underscore a 
relentless campaign of murder carried out by Hamas, Islamic jihad and 
elements of Arafat's own Fattah movement. In fact, Mr. Speaker, since 
that fateful date, September 11, the equivalent of 2,700 Israelis have 
fallen victim to Palestinian terrorism.
  Each human life is a treasure far beyond what any statistic can 
express. Both the Jewish and Islamic traditions poignantly declare that 
the saving of one human life is the equivalent of saving the world and 
the murder of one human life is the equivalent of destroying the world. 
I cite the proportional figures only as a means to illustrate, Mr. 
Speaker, the impact these killings have on a small nation of just 6 
million people.
  This Congress and the American people are angry, frustrated, and fed 
up with Arafat's cynical support of murderous criminals and his failure 
to act to prevent the killing of both Israelis and Palestinians. But 
Arafat's failure does not only lead to death; it leads to the danger 
that a bloodbath will ensue in the entire region.
  We know, Mr. Speaker, that Arafat is capable of stopping terror. We 
have seen him do so when under sufficient international pressure. Until 
he does end the terror, and end it for good, we must conclude that he 
supports it.
  It is no longer good enough, indeed, it never was, Mr. Speaker, for 
Arafat to run a revolving prison door, arresting a few low-level 
terrorists for a few days until the world diverts its glance and moves 
on to other issues.
  The Hyde-Lantos resolution provides that the Palestinian Authority 
should arrest, prosecute, and punish the perpetrators of this monstrous 
act or turn over these terrorists to the Government of Israel for 
prosecution. Our resolution urges the President of the United States to 
take any and all steps necessary to ensure that the Palestinian 
Authority complies with all of our demands. If it does not, we call on 
our President to terminate relations with Arafat and the Palestinian 
Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, in his historic speech to our joint session on September 
20, President Bush said that nations will be judged as either being 
against terrorists or being for them. In this hour of their grieving, 
Israelis should know that the American Congress and the American people 
stand resolutely with them in our joint struggle against international 
terrorism.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this piece of 
legislation. Not because it is completely flawed, it has great value in 
some of the things it says, but it has flaws.
  Before I go on to those flaws, I would like to point out that the 
previous speaker misstated this resolution. I would ask the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lantos) to use some of his remaining time to 
restate correctly this resolution.
  This resolution in its original form very outlandishly called on the 
Palestinian Authority, as though they were the perpetrators of this 
crime. It has been changed, because they are not.
  Hamas committed these two terrible attacks, for which Hamas should be 
hunted down and punished, as the President is seeking to do. But in 
fact, the Palestinian Authority is also a victim of these attacks. They 
have had loss of life as a result of this. And going to the larger 
picture of the Middle East, Israel continues to find ways to punish and 
diminish the Palestinian Authority's ability to enforce the very laws 
that they ask to be enforced by bombing their police headquarters in 
retaliation for what was taken credit by Hamas to be their act.
  Hamas is, in fact, an organization formed in opposition to the 
Palestinian Authority's very own party. I would ask that these 
inaccuracies be corrected, because in fact Hamas would like to see the 
PLO out of power. Hamas is an extreme organization with a very 
different bent than the Palestinian Authority's general way of doing 
business.
  More importantly, I would call on everyone to look at item four, 
where it urges the President to take any and all necessary steps to 
ensure the Palestinians take the actions described. That was added, and 
it was added for a good and valid reason that I hope we will all 
remember should this otherwise in some ways misguided resolution pass.
  The President could restore the $900 million that the Israeli 
Government has withheld from the Palestinian Authority. Those dollars 
were designed to allow them to enforce their laws, and yet that has 
been unlawfully and in violation of the agreement that they have made 
withheld.
  The President could see that the Palestinian Authority, who today 
only has two answers to a riot, yell at them or shoot them, because 
they are prohibited and withheld the kind of riot control equipment 
that would allow them to enforce these very sanctions that we want to 
see that they do to root out Hamas. They have no riot control 
equipment; they have no billy clubs; they have no tear gas.
  So I ask that we look at this somewhat erroneous resolution for what 
it might do for the administration, if the administration takes the 
initiative and does some positive things to undo the damage that has 
been done by Israel in breaking down the very authority that they now 
call on the United States to insist that they take these steps.
  We were just in the West Bank on a CODEL. We saw how little ability 
the PLO now has, what the effects of 14 months of not receiving the 
funding they need to do their job are.

                              {time}  1330

  This is not a perfect document. It has been improved. I would call, 
once again, on the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) to make those 
corrections so that we fairly and accurately state what item 4 and the 
rest of this document says, which is a call on Hammas, the Palestinian 
Islamic Jihad and other organizations, terrorist organizations, of 
which the Palestinian Authority is not one.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, out of extraordinary respect and affection 
for

[[Page 24027]]

the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), my good friend, I yield him 
an additional 1 minute.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bass). The gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Gilman) is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to fully 
support H. Con. Res. 280 so that the Congress can demonstrate that it 
stands in strong support of Israel as it confronts terrorism threats 
similar to the ones we have been confronted by our own Nation. I thank 
our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), our ranking minority 
member, for bringing this measure to the floor in a timely manner.
  We should be reminded that Israel has lived with these kinds of 
threats and terrorism for most of its existence, not just since 
September 11, and which have escalated just in the past few days, 
killing so many innocent civilians. Palestinian leader Chairman Arafat 
needs to know that he will receive no more second opportunities and no 
more benefits of doubt. This resolution does just that by demanding 
that Chairman Arafat root out the infrastructure of Palestinian 
terrorist organizations operating within its territory that is 
controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
  This resolution demands that Chairman Arafat either prosecute 
Palestinian terrorists and ensure that they remain in custody, or turn 
over the terrorists to Israel for prosecution. These are steps that 
Arafat, despite repeated demands from Israel and, to some extent, from 
our own Nation, that he has to undertake at this time but has refused 
to. Our resolution urges the President to suspend relations with Mr. 
Arafat, the Palestinian Authority, until they, once and for all, root 
out the terrorist infrastructure. We must not do business as usual with 
Mr. Arafat while he continues to allow Palestinian suicide bombers to 
roam freely, enabling them to carry out more destruction against 
civilians.
  Mr. Arafat has refused to crack down on these terrorist groups, 
believing that he can keep peace with the Palestinian Authority if he 
stands down from confronting the militants.
  However, these groups actually have been undermining Mr. Arafat's 
leadership by provoking Israel and preventing negotiations from 
yielding peace and prosperity for the Palestinian people.
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution puts other governments on notice that we 
in the Congress are watching their behavior toward Palestinian 
terrorism as well. Governments such as Syria and Iran must not be 
permitted to fund, to arm and to harbor Palestinian terrorist groups 
with immunity and then hide behind tepid words of support for the 
United States' efforts against the Taliban and bin Laden. Syria has 
allowed Hammas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad to maintain their 
headquarters in Damascus and to operate training camps in the Bekaa 
Valley of Lebanon. Iran provides about 10 percent of Hammas' total 
budget and virtually all of the funds used by Palestinian Islamic 
Jihad, according to a wide variety of reports and analyses. It also 
funds weapons to Hizbollah in Lebanon, an organization that helps train 
Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
  In conclusion, let me say, Mr. Speaker, that the passage of this 
resolution will send to Chairman Arafat a clear, strong message that 
our patience with him is at an end. As some Israeli leaders have noted, 
Mr. Arafat should be told to either surrender the terrorists, or 
surrender his power. The same policies that we are pursuing against 
Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan should be applied to Mr. Arafat. I urge 
my colleagues to fully support this measure.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to the gentlewoman from 
Nevada, I want to make some observations on the speaker prior to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
  I do not take back one single word of my statement. Units of Arafat 
Palestinian Authority have participated repeatedly in the most heinous 
terrorist acts and claimed credit for it. Arafat paid tribute to mass 
murderers and assassins on a repeated basis. He is part and parcel of 
the terrorist cabal.
  Let me also say, with respect to sanctimonious statements about 
peace, there was an opportunity for peace when, under President 
Clinton's leadership and at his urging, former Prime Minister Barak 
made sweeping and phenomenal concessions to the Palestinian Authority, 
and instead of accepting those or coming up with a counteroffer, he 
started a 14-month mass murder, sweeping the region, with hundreds of 
Israelis and Palestinians being killed, the Palestinian economy in 
shambles, tourism in the whole region from Egypt to Lebanon dead. All 
of it because of terrorism and violence.
  Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), my distinguished colleague and 
good friend.
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Hyde-Lantos 
resolution.
  I would like to personally thank both the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for bringing 
this measure to the floor and for their excellent leadership on our 
committee.
  Mr. Speaker, after the vile terrorist attacks perpetrated by 
Palestinian suicide bombers this weekend in Israel, many are claiming 
that this is the moment of truth for Yasar Arafat. The fact is, 
Chairman Arafat has had too many moments of truth, and he has failed 
them all.
  The patience of the United States has been abused time and again by 
the Palestinian leadership. It is far past time for Chairman Arafat to 
start producing results. He started this Intifada over a year ago after 
rejecting Prime Minister Barak's generous calls for peace and, since 
then, has chosen to ignore America's calls for negotiation in favor of 
blowing up discos and pedestrian malls. Mr. Arafat and the entire 
Palestinian leadership must listen very clearly to the message that we 
are sending: You have gained nothing by killing innocent teenagers, 
except the wrath of America, Israel and the civilized international 
community.
  Palestinian apologists have tried to link these terrorist attacks to 
Israeli policies. Let me say loud and clear that those who make this 
argument are the same, in many instances, who claim that the attacks on 
America on September 11 were motivated by America's foreign policy. 
Only the most despicable or deliberately blind human beings can 
rationalize the murder of innocent teenagers for a supposed political 
cause.
  Mr. Speaker, our patience with the Palestinian leadership has run its 
course. American policy is clear that our enemies are terrorists 
everywhere and all governments that support them. This resolution says 
once and for all to Chairman Arafat, what side are you on? Do you 
support terror, or will you immediately and permanently dismantle the 
terrorist organizations that act freely within your territory?
  Hamas and other terrorist organizations operate with a free hand 
because Arafat allows them to. If Arafat cannot control these 
terrorists, then why are we propping him up and pretending that he has 
the ability to negotiate with Israel for peace? If Chairman Arafat 
fails to act, then it is time to regard the Palestinian Authority as 
supporters of terror and deal with them as such. The choice, as it has 
always been, is Chairman Arafat's to make.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, Yasar Arafat says that he cannot control the terrorists. 
It seems that we have a relatively easy decision to make. Why do we not 
take him at his word? If he cannot control the terrorists, then he 
should not pretend that he can bring peace, and we ought to stop 
negotiating with him. We need to look elsewhere among the Palestinians 
for negotiating partners. If Yasar Arafat is responsible, then 
terrorists under his control over the

[[Page 24028]]

weekend killed 26 Israelis. If he is responsible, he needs to be held 
accountable for his actions. We need to remember that Arafat has never 
outlawed Hammas, he has never confiscated its weapons, he has never 
shut down its training camps, and he has never even publicly condemned 
it by name.
  In 1997, then Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said that Arafat 
had a revolving door justice system when it came to handling 
terrorists. Things have not changed.
  Again, the U.S. simply needs to determine, is Arafat in control, or 
is he not? I would suggest that, in either case, we ought to stop 
negotiating with him.
  Further, there are better uses for taxpayer dollars than to prop up 
terrorists and their regimes. If we find that he is not in control, 
stop negotiating with him. If he is in control, hold him accountable. 
We ought to begin the post-Arafat era.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution and not, 
obviously, because it condemns violence. We all condemn the violence. 
But there is more to this resolution than just condemning the violence. 
I have a problem with most resolutions like this because it endorses a 
foreign policy that I do not endorse, and it does that by putting on 
unecessary demands. So the demands part of this resolution is the part 
that I object to, not the condemnation of violence.
  By doing this, we serve to antagonize. We hear today talk about 
having solidarity with Israel. Others get up and try in their best way 
to defend the Palestinians and the Arabs. So it is sort of a contest: 
Should be we pro-Israel or pro-Arab, or anti-Israel or anti-Arab, and 
how are we perceived in doing this? It is pretty important.
  But I think there is a third option to this that we so often forget 
about. Why can we not be pro-American? What is in the best interests of 
the United States? We have not even heard that yet.
  I believe that it is in the best interests of the United States not 
to get into a fight, a fight that we do not have the wisdom to figure 
out.
  Now, I would like to have neutrality. That has been the tradition for 
America, at least a century ago, to be friends with everybody, trade 
with everybody, and to be neutral, unless somebody declares war against 
us, but not to demand that we pick sides in every fight in the world. 
Yet, this is what we are doing. I think our perceptions are in error, 
because it is not intended that we make the problem worse. Obviously, 
the authors of the resolution, do not want to make the problem worse. 
But we have to realize, perceptions are pretty important. So the 
perceptions are, yes, we have solidarity with Israel. What is the 
opposite of solidarity? It is hostility. So if we have solidarity with 
Israel, then we have hostility to the Palestinians.
  I have a proposal and a suggestion which I think fits the American 
tradition. We should treat both sides equally, but in a different way. 
Today we treat both sides equally by giving both sides money and 
telling them what to do. Not $1 million here or there, not $100 million 
here or there, but tens of billions of dollars over decades to both 
sides; always trying to buy peace.
  My argument is that it generally does not work, that there are 
unintended consequences. These things backfire. They come back to haunt 
us. We should start off by defunding, defunding both sides. I am just 
not for giving all of this money, because every time there are 
civilians killed on the Israeli side or civilians killed on the 
Palestinian side, we can be assured that either our money was used 
directly or indirectly to do that killing.

                              {time}  1345

  So we are, in a way, an accomplice on all of this killing because we 
fund both sides. So I would argue we should consider neutrality, to 
consider friendship with both sides, and not to pretend that we are all 
so wise that we know exactly with whom to have solidarity. I think that 
is basically our problem. We have a policy that is doomed to fail in 
the Middle East; and it fails slowly and persistently, always drawing 
us in, always demanding more money.
  With the Arabs, we cannot tell the Arabs to get lost. The Arabs are 
important. They have a lot of oil under their control. We cannot flaunt 
the Arabs and say, get lost. We must protect our oil. It is called 
``our oil.'' At the same time, there is a strong constituency for never 
offending Israel.
  I think that we cannot buy peace under these circumstances. I think 
we can contribute by being more neutral. I think we can contribute a 
whole lot by being friends with both sides. But I believe the money is 
wasted, it is spent unwisely, and it actually does not serve the 
interests of the American people.
  First, it costs us money. That means that we have to take this money 
from the American taxpayer.
  Second, it does not achieve the peace that we all hope to have.
  Therefore, the policy of foreign noninterventionism, where the United 
States is not the bully and does not come in and tell everybody exactly 
what to do, by putting demands on them, I think if we did not do that, 
yes, we could still have some moral authority to condemn violence.
  But should we not condemn violence equally? Could it be true that 
only innocent civilians have died on one side and not the other? I do 
not believe that to be the care. I believe that it happens on both 
sides, and on both sides they use our money to do it.
  I urge a no vote on this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, like most Americans, I was appalled by the suicide 
bombings in Israel over the weekend. I am appalled by all acts of 
violence targeting noncombatants. The ongoing cycle of violence in the 
Middle East is robbing generations of their hopes and dreams and 
freedom. The cycle of violence ensures economic ruin and encourages 
political extremism; it punishes, most of all, the innocent.
  The people of the Middle East must find a way to break this cycle of 
violence. As Secretary of State Colin Powell told the House 
International Relations Committee in October, ``You have got to find a 
way not to find justifications for what we are doing, but to get out of 
what we are doing to break the cycle.''
  Mr. Speaker, I agree with our Secretary of State. The Secretary also 
said that we need to move beyond seeing the two sides there as ``just 
enemies.'' I agree with that too. But I don't think this piece of 
legislation moves us any closer to that important goal. While it 
rightly condemns the senseless acts of violence against the innocent, 
it unfortunately goes much further than that--and that is where I 
regrettably must part company with this bill. Rather than stopping at 
condemning terrorism, this bill makes specific demands in Israel and 
the Palestinian areas regarding internal policy and specifically the 
apprehension and treatment of suspected terrorists. I don't think that 
is our job here in Congress.
  Further, it recommends that the President suspend all relations with 
Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian Authority if they do not abide by the 
demands of this piece of legislation. I don't think this is a very 
helpful approach to the problem. Ceasing relations with one side in the 
conflict is, in effect, picking sides in the conflict. I don't think 
that has been our policy, nor is it in our best interest, be it in the 
Middle East, Central Asia, or anywhere else. The people of the United 
States contribute a substantial amount of money to both Israel and to 
the Palestinian people. We have made it clear in our policy and with 
our financial assistance that we are not taking sides in the conflict, 
but rather seeking a lasting peace in the region. Even with the recent, 
terrible attack. I don't think this is the time for Congress to attempt 
to subvert our government's policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  Finally, the bill makes an attempt to join together our own fight 
against those who have attacked the Untied States on September 11 and 
Israel's ongoing dispute with the Palestinians. I don't think that is 
necessary. We are currently engaged in a very difficult and costly 
effort to seek out and bring to justice those who have attacked us and 
those who supported them, ``wherever they may be,'' as the president 
has said. Today's reports of the possible loss of at least two our 
servicemen in Afghanistan drives that point home very poignantly. As 
far as I know, none of those who attacked us had ties to Palestine or 
were harbored there. Mr. Speaker, I think we can all condemn terrorism 
wherever it may be without committing the United States to joining 
endless ongoing conflicts across the globe.

[[Page 24029]]


  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me, and I thank him for his leadership.
  I also want to commend the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) 
and, again, the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Gilman), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for 
the work they have done.
  I rise in strong support of this resolution to express solidarity 
with Israel and the fight against terrorism. We have had leadership on 
the Committee on International Relations that has helped us to ensure 
our support for Israel, and I want to thank them all for their 
leadership.
  The citizens of Israel know too well the threat of terrorism. This 
past weekend was another brutal example: 26 Israeli citizens were 
murdered and 175 were wounded by the terrorist group Hamas and the 
Palestinian jihad, all within 14 hours. This bloody weekend was part of 
an ongoing campaign aimed at youth and families, unacceptable acts of 
terrorism.
  To bring an end to terrorism in Israel, Chairman Arafat has to live 
up to his agreements, including commitments made to stop this violence 
against civilians. That means fulfilling promises of prosecutions. His 
ability to maintain the rule of law would finally demonstrate a 
Palestinian interest in engaging in discussions of peace.
  Without serious action to eliminate, even harness terrorism, Arafat 
cannot expect any opportunity for negotiations.
  So the United States stands united with Israel in the effort to 
eliminate the terrorist attacks against our citizens. Our continued 
unification with other nations on this issue must not cease to be heard 
around the world. Our Arab allies, indeed, must understand our position 
and encourage Chairman Arafat to take the necessary steps against known 
terrorist organizations, and support him publicly when he does.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 
280 to express our support and solidarity for the citizens of Israel.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), the distinguished 
ranking member of the Middle East subcommittee of the Committee on 
International Relations.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am outraged by the statement of one of 
the previous speakers who has now left the floor who said, with his 
unique sense of justice, that we should treat everybody equally; that 
we should treat the terrorists and victims the same; that we should 
treat Hamas the same way and look at them in the same way that we treat 
little girls going to a disco, or grandmothers taking their 
grandchildren out for pizza for lunch. That is not justice; that is 
ridiculous.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution. I would like 
to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and the 
ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for their 
outstanding efforts in crafting this resolution and getting it to the 
floor in so timely a fashion.
  I believe it is critically important at this moment, this moment of 
truth, for the House of Representatives to speak out against the 
Palestinian terrorism which has cost so many innocent Israelis their 
lives.
  It is well past time for Congress to say enough, enough killing, 
enough terror, and finally, enough duplicity, excuses, and lies. 
Palestinian terrorism is not an accident; it is not an uncontrollable 
cycle. In fact, it is the result of a deliberate, deliberate refusal by 
the Palestinian Authority to crack down on terrorist groups like Hamas 
and the Palestinian Islamic jihad.
  It is the result of the Palestinian Authority's revolving-door prison 
policy, and the Palestinian leadership's unconscionable refusal to 
arrest terrorists whose names and addresses are made familiar by 
endless Israeli requests for action, requests that have been confirmed 
by our own government.
  Hamas is a terrorist group, and the PA harbors them. Our President 
says there is no difference, that the Palestinian Authority must be 
held accountable for these grotesque decisions which make any hope of 
peace an impossibility.
  The Palestinian people have legitimate grievances and they have a 
right to express them; but they have no right, no right, no right to 
blow up and murder innocent men, women, and children.
  Mr. Speaker, the United States cannot work during the day with 
Palestinian leaders on ``the peace of the brave'' while in the evening 
they turn a blind eye to terrorist bombings, shootings, and mayhem. As 
President Bush made so clear in his address to this Congress and to the 
American people, the time has come for every Nation and national group 
to choose: they are either with us or they are with the terrorists.
  The Palestinian Authority has exactly that choice to make now. Either 
they destroy the infrastructure of Hamas, Islamic jihad, and other 
terrorist groups, or they will lose their relationships with the 
Congress, lose their relationship with the United States, and in the 
end, stand to lose much more than that.
  Mr. Speaker, we must pass this excellent resolution. Again, I want to 
thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) and the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lantos) for helping the House to find its voice on 
this very critical issue.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that each side be 
given an additional 5 minutes, since we have some additional speakers.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bass). Is there objection to the request 
of the gentleman from New York?
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I just want 
to hear again what my good friend said.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would tell the gentleman, I am asking for 
an additional 5 minutes for each side, since we have additional 
speakers.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) will each be recognized for an additional 5 
minutes.


  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I will be voting for House Concurrent 
Resolution 280. This bill reflects my abhorrence and total condemnation 
of terrorist attacks on innocent Israelis, noncombatants. That attack, 
carried out on December 1 and 2, mutilated and killed 26 noncombatants, 
and 175 were wounded. These were human beings: men, women, and 
children, young people, and seniors. This monstrous atrocity must be 
condemned by all who believe in morality, all who believe in God, all 
who seek a better world and seek peace.
  We condemn this as we condemn all attacks which have targeted 
Israelis and noncombatants in the decades past. This unconditional 
condemnation of such attacks on Israel, on their noncombatants, is 
totally justified.
  But that is not enough. If America is to be a peacemaker in the 
Middle East, if we are to take a principled stand that will then be 
taken seriously by both sides when we condemn terrorism, we must 
condemn with equal moral outrage the murderous assaults on Palestinian 
noncombatants.
  There are piles of bodies in the Middle East today, piles of bodies 
of innocent people. The Economist Magazine recently noted that the 
number of Palestinian noncombatants who have been

[[Page 24030]]

killed in these last 6 weeks far outnumber the number of Israeli 
victims.
  But there have been victims on both sides; and we need to equally, 
with equal fervor, condemn these attacks on innocent people. We should 
have zero tolerance, zero tolerance of this brutal terrorism that has 
kept the Middle East in such turmoil.
  But let me note that does not mean, because we condemn this 
terrorism, that we close our eyes to the fact that Israeli soldiers are 
mowing down young boys who are doing nothing more than throwing rocks, 
a nonlethal weapon, and they use deadly force.
  There are people in this body who are, with me, dedicated to human 
rights who would never permit a regime anywhere in the world to use 
such deadly force against people who are simply throwing rocks in order 
to call the public attention to their seeking justice for their cause. 
The killing of an Israeli soldier does not justify the shelling, 
indiscriminate shelling, of Palestinian villages, which has been part 
of their policy in the past, as well.
  If we are to be taken seriously about condemning terrorism, if we are 
to be a peacemaker in the Middle East, and that is what we should be 
whenever there is an act of terrorism, we need to step forward; and we 
have not done it when the Palestinians are the victims.
  Today I am going to vote for this resolution because I wholeheartedly 
condemn the killing that we are talking about here, with these poor 
Israeli people, 26 of them, and 175 wounded. These young people who are 
wounded probably have no legs, young people being disfigured all their 
lives. This is a horror story.
  But it is an equal horror story when those things are done on 
Palestinians by the Israeli soldiers, and we need to be a peacemaker 
and not just give blanket approval to everything Israel does.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to tell my good friend, the gentleman from 
California, that there is an enormous difference between targeting 
innocent civilians and collateral damage.
  Today, as we speak, American soldiers were killed, killed in 
Afghanistan by our own forces inadvertently. There is a difference of 
the whole world between deliberately killing innocent civilians and 
retaliating, doing one's utmost to avoid killing civilians and, 
tragically, mistakes occurring. I think this distinction must be made 
on this floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the 
distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for allowing me this 
time.
  Let me also thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his 
leadership in bringing forth this resolution and thank the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), as well.
  Mr. Speaker, some of our colleagues are concerned about taking a 
side. We are taking a side; we are taking a side against terrorists. We 
cannot be neutral when it comes to terrorists. Our President has said 
it very clearly: they are either on our side in the fight against the 
terrorists, or they are on the side of the terrorists.
  This resolution is very straightforward. It supports the resolve of 
the people of Israel, and it lends the support of our Nation in their 
war against terrorists.

                              {time}  1400

  That is exactly what the President and we asked of the American 
people after the attack on our country on September 11. We asked for 
the resolve of our people and their national support. There should not 
be a different standard here. We all should be opposed to the terrorist 
activities and support this war.
  Mr. Arafat must make a choice. He either will join us in rooting out 
the terrorists in the Middle East or he will continue to be an 
ineffective leader. If he wants to be the leader of the Palestinian 
people that brings peace to the Middle East, then he must engage us, as 
this resolution calls upon him to do, to root out terrorists in the 
Middle East.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a resolution that I hope all of us would 
support. It shows that we will not compromise with terrorists. It shows 
that we are united as a Nation, we are united in our international 
coalition to root out terrorist activities, whether they occur in the 
United States, whether they occur in Israel, or wherever they occur. 
Innocent people should not be targets. We cannot compromise that issue.
  This resolution speaks to that, and I urge my colleagues to support 
the resolution, to put this body on record against terrorism.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I want to make it clear that this resolution 
started off as one that I could not support, and, in its final form, it 
is one that I will vote for, not because anything I said was less 
accurate. There are unsaid things. There are, in fact, challenges that 
the Israeli government has not met that I would hope they meet, but I 
would say that in the final analysis that we as a body must speak about 
the wrong actions that occurred, regardless of what is not in this 
document or any flaws that remain.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to our 
distinguished colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I stand up to say, enough is enough. I rise 
in strong support of this resolution, and I am proud to be a cosponsor. 
I commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman, and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), our ranking member, for 
bringing this measure before us this afternoon.
  I was both saddened and infuriated by the events that transpired in 
Jerusalem and Haifa this past weekend. Saddened because 26 people were 
murdered and 175 were injured in a cowardly terrorist attack. 
Infuriated because Yasser Arafat and his Palestinian Authority have 
done nothing to prevent these attacks since the peace process began.
  Arresting low-level Hamas operatives to demonstrate that he is doing 
something is fooling absolutely no one. Arafat's declaration that he is 
cracking down on Palestinian terrorists is about as effective as the 
police inspector played by Claude Rains in Casablanca when he said, 
round up the usual suspects, while Humphrey Bogart got away.
  The revolving door policy at Palestinian jails must end immediately. 
After years of negotiating with Arafat and the Palestinian Authority to 
no avail, it may be time to ask if Arafat is truly a partner interested 
in peace. As the old adage goes, actions speak louder than words. 
Arafat's actions suggest that we have been wasting our time in dealing 
with him.
  Mr. Arafat, our patience has finally run out. You have no more 
bargaining chips left. President Bush issued a challenge to the world 
when he said, you are either with us or you are with the terrorists. 
Clearly, you have chosen.
  Following the events of September 11, Americans have experienced what 
the Israelis have been dealing with since 1948. The Israeli government 
was there for us on 9/11, and we need to be with the Israelis today.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. 
Res. 280; and I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the 
chairman; the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking 
member; and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) for bringing this 
measure to the floor so quickly.
  As was stated earlier, this past weekend we witnessed some of the 
bloodiest and most gruesome terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens by 
Palestinian terrorist organizations. These terrorist attacks are just 
another reminder that Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and 
his closest confidants continue to be the largest obstacle to peace in 
the Middle East by contributing to the reign of terror.

[[Page 24031]]

  Each and every day Israelis and now Americans face disruptions to our 
normal civilized daily lives by the constant threat and now reality of 
suicide bombers and terrorist attacks. I commend President Bush for his 
actions yesterday in freezing the assets of the Holy Land Foundation 
for Relief and Development, which poses as a charitable organization 
but, in fact, funnels millions of dollars annually to Hamas.
  In response to an earlier speaker who asked, when are we going to 
start acting in the U.S. interests, I pose and ask, are not we acting 
in the interests when we shut down organizations as that who are 
operating within our borders? Those organizations are using our laws to 
operate to raise money for terrorist activities which can just as 
easily take place in Israel and as we saw on 9/11 here in America.
  We in America, under the leadership of President Bush, have set out 
to make Americans and freedom-loving people safer against the 
terrorists. As stated in the Bush doctrine, there is no distinction 
between the terrorists and those who harbor them. Just as al-Qaida 
receives support and sanctuary from the Taliban, Hamas, Palestinian, 
Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and others are provided a sanctuary and with 
land to operate and with support from Mr. Arafat and his confidants.
  Mr. Speaker, the time has come for the United States to stop talking 
about waiting for Arafat to fulfill certain conditions. How many times 
will we demand he reign in the terror and stop the killing? How many 
U.S. taxpayer dollars must we spend and entrust to Arafat and his 
Palestinian Authority as they continue to harbor the terrorists?
  Mr. Speaker, the United States and Israel share common values and 
freedom of choice, and I believe this resolution signals what should be 
the end of the road for American patience with Mr. Arafat.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution 
condemning the terrorist outrages committed by the Palestinian 
terrorist groups and expressing our solidarity with Israel.
  Mr. Speaker, there can be no peace and no real negotiations as long 
as such terrorist attacks continue. Mr. Arafat denounces these 
terrorist attacks but operates a revolving door prison system, that 
encourages the terrorists to continue. He then lionizes the terrorist 
murderers and, in fact, gives death benefits and pensions to the 
families of the suicide bombers.
  He is obviously not honest in his opposition to terrorism, and he 
permits it to continue and, indeed, promotes it.
  Mr. Speaker, there can be no moral equivalency between the deliberate 
attacks of the terrorists on Israeli civilians and the unfortunate 
deaths of civilians who are victims when Israel attempts to attack the 
terrorists to prevent further terrorist attacks.
  Mr. Arafat must now be held to destroy the terrorist infrastructure 
now. If Arafat does not do this very quickly, then Israel in all 
likelihood will take upon itself the necessity of doing so. Israel will 
have to exercise its inherent right of self-defense, as the United 
States is now doing in Afghanistan, and that will greatly escalate the 
situation.
  The key to the Oslo agreement for peace talks was the renunciation of 
violence by both sides as leverage in negotiations. Israel has 
renounced that violence. Arafat, obviously, has used it as a tool. 
After Prime Minister Barak made a breathtaking offer of concession to 
Israel last year, Arafat reacted not by agreeing, not by a 
counteroffer, but by starting a war which has escalated into a war 
against civilians.
  I support this resolution. We must stop that war. Israel, if 
necessary, must exercise its right of self-defense to stop that war 
against civilians, and no one on earth can tell a sovereign nation not 
to fight to protect its citizens against the kind of terrorist 
murderers who murdered people in Jerusalem last week and in New York 
City on September 11.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, there comes a time in the life of a democracy 
when their leaders must respond to terror by unleashing a terrible, 
swift sword. That is this time for our allies in Israel.
  Under the previous prime minister, Yasar Arafat was offered a choice. 
At Camp David and again at Taba, he chose between an offer of 97 
percent of the territories or the gun. He chose the gun.
  Many Americans thought that Arafat could make a courageous decision 
like Nelson Mandela to surrender the gun and govern a state, or Arafat 
could follow the path of Fidel Castro and preside over increasing 
isolation and destruction. Arafat chose unwisely and conducted a wave 
of violence against teenagers and commuters.
  His apologists say that Arafat has no power. They are wrong. He has 
no judgment. President Bush put the question clearly after September 
11, you are either with the terrorists or you are with the West. You 
cannot condemn the Taliban and hug Hezbollah. Egypt and Jordan chose 
wisely: Peace with Israel. Arafat chose war.
  He is now harvesting the wrath of a democracy and her American ally. 
Americans are best when we stand with our democratic allies, and now is 
the time to stand with Israel. Together, we will show that the way of 
the suicide bomber leads nowhere, and only negotiations with the 
democratically elected leaders of Israel can lead to peace.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and especially the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) for his leadership on this.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). The Chair would announce that 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has 3 minutes left. The 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) has 17 minutes left. The 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) has 3 minutes left.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to our 
distinguished colleague from New York (Mr. Weiner).
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, Lewis Carroll wrote about a language where 
down is up, black is white as jabberwocky, and some of the opponents of 
this resolution are engaged in it today.
  The very distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) talks 
about the despair of the Palestinian people as if it is a rationale for 
dynamite laced with nails in the middle of a busy square in front of a 
pizzeria and an ice cream parlor, as if the slaughter of innocents is 
somehow a legitimate form of political speech.
  My friend from California says, oh, we have got the wrong villain. It 
is not the Palestinian Authority, it is not Arafat, it is Hamas, and if 
only you give him the chance and the tools to stamp out Hamas, he can 
do it.
  Well, he asked for control of the territories. The Palestinian 
Authority has it; 95 percent of those that live in the territories are 
under Palestinian control. He says, I need a police force to control 
violence. The Israelis gave him a police force, gave him guns, gave 
those fighting against them guns. He said, that is not enough. He said, 
I need a list of the terrorists. Well, the Israelis gave him that, too. 
They refuse to arrest them, and then they go and slaughter innocents. 
We cannot have it both ways.
  Some say Arafat is powerless. Well, if he is powerless, let us adopt 
President Bush's admonition and toss him upon the dust heap of history; 
and if he is powerful enough to be a partner for peace, let me ask why 
is it in his entire history he has not given a single speech in Arabic 
telling his people that it is time to live in peace with Israel. Not a 
single one.
  Ask him why it is that he has never stopped educating the young 
people in the Palestinian territories to hate from their very youngest 
age. He even stopped a program called Seeds of Peace which let young 
people from Israel and from the territories get together and share 
their common interests.
  On September 11, we in the United States learned what it was like to 
live in Israel. We would not think of saying

[[Page 24032]]

to Osama bin Laden, well, let us negotiate, let us take it easy, let us 
give him a chance. We would never think about giving them Texas and 
Louisiana if only they would go away. We would never think of that 
then. We should not even consider that today.
  We should pass this very strong resolution, and we should do even 
more in the future.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would like to remind the House 
that Members should address their comments to the Chair and not to 
other Members in the second person.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all persons who 
control time be given equally an additional 10 minutes. I know some of 
my colleagues do not need it, but in the spirit of collegiality, we do 
not want to stifle discussion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. LANTOS. In view of the objection heard, Mr. Speaker, I ask 
unanimous consent that each side be given an additional 5 minutes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
  Mr. ENGEL. I thank my colleague from California, the ranking member, 
for yielding me this time; and I also thank the chairman.
  I rise in very, very strong support of this resolution. I want to 
read a quote from President Bush right from his resolution, when he 
stated on September 20: ``Every Nation and every region now has a 
decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the 
terrorists. From this day forward, any Nation that continues to harbor 
or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile 
regime.''
  Mr. Speaker, we are in Afghanistan going after the Taliban not 
because we think the Taliban plotted and planned the terrorist attacks 
on September 11, but because the Taliban harbored Osama bin Laden and 
al Qaeda, which planned these attacks. Well, if it is okay for the 
United States to knock off the Taliban because they did nothing to 
prevent terrorist acts and indeed harbored the terrorists, then Israel 
has the same right to go after Yasar Arafat because he has done nothing 
to stop terrorism.
  No one is saying he sits there and plans and plots the terrorist 
attacks, but he certainly does nothing to stop them. Either he cannot 
stop them, at which point what is the point in talking to him; or he 
refuses to stop them, which at the same point there is no sense talking 
to him. He has had time.
  My colleagues have mentioned where there were generous peace 
proposals, far beyond what any Israeli prime minister could have 
offered, and Yasar Arafat rejected the peace proposals of then Prime 
Minister Barak, and, worse than rejecting it, he walked away from the 
process. He did not make any counterproposal. He did not try to squeeze 
a few more concessions out of the Israelis. He walked away and he 
unleashed the intifada. As far as I am concerned, I am at my wits' end 
with Yasar Arafat, because he has not shown that he is a partner for 
peace. In order to be a partner for peace, it takes two to tango. As 
far as I am concerned right now, Israel is without a partner to 
negotiate peace.
  Now, Hamas, Islamic jihad, all the terrorists have had revolving-door 
justice from Mr. Arafat. He arrests them and lets them out the back 
door. The game is played time and time and time again. He will come 
here to Washington, and he will issue statements in English condemning 
terrorism. He does not issue those statements in Arabic. He does not 
call for peace with Israel in Arabic. He does not do anything to help 
the plight of his own people. In fact, Islamic jihad and Hamas 
represent at least as much a threat to him and his authority and his 
people as they do to Israel.
  We have to condemn terrorism with every force we have. And for the 
question before that was asked, what is in the best interest of the 
United States, the best interest of the United States is to go after 
terrorists wherever they rear their ugly head, in the United States, in 
Israel, or anywhere around the world. I wholeheartedly support this 
resolution and urge its passage.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time, and I commend him and the ranking member for their outstanding 
leadership on this very timely resolution.
  Twenty-six innocent people in Israel murdered in cold blood, 175 
wounded by Palestinian terrorists all within 14 hours. On a 
proportional basis, as our resolution provides, this would represent 
1,200 American deaths and 8,000 wounded. Today, I rise as a proud and 
humbled cosponsor of House Concurrent Resolution 280 expressing 
solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism.
  I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that we should do no less than we will 
do in this Chamber today: condemn the vicious terrorist attacks that 
have resulted in the deprivation of sons and daughters, husbands and 
wives, and grandparents of the families in Israel; expressing outrage 
today, as we do, of the ongoing Palestinian terrorist campaign, which 
is not, as some in the media say, a cycle of violence; but it is 
violence against the people of Israel and the self-defense of Israel. 
And we also demand today that the Palestinian Authority destroy the 
infrastructure of Palestinian terrorist groups, pursue and arrest 
terrorists, and bring them to justice; and our efforts both commend the 
President and urge all necessary steps be taken to ensure such actions 
by the Palestinian Authority are timely indeed.
  I rise today, Mr. Speaker, as a Christian American from the heartland 
of this country, the great State of Indiana. And I am here to say that 
I represent hundreds of thousands of Americans who still believe that 
He will bless those who bless Israel. It is from this tender regard of 
the American people that this nation sprang back into existence in its 
historic homeland in 1948, and the enemies of Israel should know that 
that regard remains to this day.
  I pray for the peace of Jerusalem. May there be peace within her 
walls and security within her citadels. May the grieving families hear 
from this Congress today the voice of sympathy and the voice of 
solidarity, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my 
good friend and distinguished colleague from Maryland (Mr. Wynn).
  Mr. WYNN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time and also for his outstanding leadership on this issue. I rise in 
strong support of Israel's fight against terrorism.
  The blood of combatants is unfortunate but understandable. The blood 
of innocents is intolerable and unacceptable. Today, we deal with that 
blood; and we first have to say that we must not have and shed the 
blood of innocents on either side. Now, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Lantos) correctly made the distinction that sometimes in the 
course of collateral damage innocent Palestinian blood has been shed, 
and we must say in all sincerity that that is truly a tragedy. But 
today we address a different situation, the targeted and deliberate 
shedding of innocent blood of Israelis, Israeli youth in many 
instances; and that is unacceptable.
  But it is not enough to come down here today and condemn from afar. I 
think we also have to today say, in addition to the fact that we 
condemn terrorism, we have to examine our role as a country, our 
foreign policy. We cannot stand on the sidelines. We have to have more 
engagement. We have to press for a workable and serious cease-fire. We 
have to continue the peace process, because it is only through the

[[Page 24033]]

peace process that we can end the shedding of innocent blood. And we 
have to have accountability for individuals and countries, some of whom 
are our allies, who tolerate, incite, and ignore the proposals of 
hatred within their own borders. Because it is this cycle of hatred 
that really causes the violence that we decry today.
  So we need to both condemn today the terrorism that caused these 
tragic deaths and also look inside our own foreign policy to see how we 
can do more to combat this problem that is affecting the Middle East 
today.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to our 
distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel).
  Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in strong support of this resolution today.
  The increased violence in the Middle East and the horrible acts of 
terror against Israelis have recaptured the attention of the world. And 
as we refocus on the Middle East, and in our mutual search for peace, 
we have to be willing to denounce and decry the horrible acts of 
violence against civilians. The inexcusable terror directed against 
Israelis must be condemned by the world.
  We must hold Yasar Arafat responsible for stopping that terror. 
Israel surely has a right to hold him responsible, the United Nations 
and the United States must hold him responsible, and the world must 
hold him responsible.
  Israel surely has a right to defend herself, and we are seeing that 
today. She surely has a right to act firmly to prevent further acts of 
terror. But we must, as we criticize appropriately Yasar Arafat, we 
have to keep our eyes on the ball, which is not so much Yasar Arafat 
and his terrible failings, but the hope that is offered by George 
Mitchell and George Tenant. The Mitchell plan and the Tenant principles 
to restart the peace process have to be the focus of this country.
  We need to move forward with a cooling off period, a cease-fire, of 
confidence-building measures and must restart the peace process. That 
is the highest priority, and I call on the House to give our full 
support to it.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to our 
distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). The Chair would advise that the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Deutsch).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) is 
recognized for 2 minutes.
  Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the Committee 
on International Relations as well as the ranking member of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce for yielding me this time.
  I urge my colleagues to read the resolution. I urge my colleagues to 
read it because I think when they read it, there should be no votes 
against it on the floor. I know a number of Members have spoken against 
it today; but I urge them to read the specifics, because I do not think 
there is anything in this resolution that any Member in good faith can 
be against.
  There are things that Members can object to about Israeli policies, 
and there is a debate that we can go and we should articulate. But what 
this resolution is really talking to is specifically acts of terrorism, 
acts of terrorism that, as Mr. Zinn has said, and I quote, ``the 
deepest evil one can imagine.'' And that is what we are condemning 
today, to show that this Congress and the American people are grieving, 
are feeling some of the pain, although not as significant as the pain 
that Israelis individually and families are feeling today.
  We have a unique role to play as America, as the world's only 
superpower, as a linchpin of Israel's survival and security. In fact, 
our role as Members of Congress are as linchpins of any potential peace 
in the region.
  I have not given up hope. This week, Jews throughout the world are 
going to read a passage in the Torah about Joseph being thrown into 
slavery and being in a prison, and it looks as if the worst possible 
time exists for him. Yet at that worst possible time, by our faith and 
by our belief, we understand that there is hope for peace.
  But I urge all of my colleagues to support the resolution.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 7 minutes.
  This is a very important debate and one which merits the careful 
attention of all of our colleagues. And it is one on which the body 
here should remain focused on the issues which are before us.
  What is the real issue that confronts the United States? Is it this 
resolution, or is it real and lasting peace in the Middle East? The 
answer is our concerns are peace in the Middle East, peace for the 
Israelis, peace for the Palestinians, peace for the other Arab and 
Muslim countries in the area. And without that, there will be no peace 
and no security for the United States, as September 11 shows us.
  I have heard a number of my colleagues say, that, you are either for 
us or against us on terrorism. I am aware of no one in this body who 
does not join me in opposition to terrorism. And I am aware of no one 
in this body who does not feel that peace is in the best interest of 
all. I am also aware of no member here who is not supportive of the 
continued existence of the State of Israel, and who does not feel that 
this should be a part of American policy and concern.
  I am troubled, however, when I hear some of my colleagues, as they 
have done in this debate, talk about how the issue here is terrorism, 
and you are either with us or against us on terrorism. Not so! The 
issue is peace and how to achieve it. That must be our debate and our 
focus.

                              {time}  1430

  Peace is the important issue, and it is the one that concerns us 
above all others in the Mid East. It is one which we have addressed in 
our resolutions earlier and which we are addressing now through actions 
diplomatically and militarily.
  Now what should be the focus of the debate here is something quite 
different, and that is how we focus the efforts and the energies of the 
United States to bring about peace. I have introduced H. Con. Res. 253 
which expresses support for the Mitchell Commission Report. No action 
has been taken by the Committee on International Relations, and yet 
that is something which the United States should be speaking and upon 
which this body should be speaking.
  I have heard nothing in this debate from the other side about what 
they propose to do to bring about a real peace. Is the termination of 
the existence of Mr. Arafat as the head of the Palestinian Authority in 
the best interests of the United States? Will that resolve the 
controversies? No, it will simply eliminate somebody who is a potential 
participant in meaningful peace talks, and one who with proper support 
can provide useful leadership.
  What we suggest here is to bring all of the parties together and make 
them talk. Let us use the full prestige and the power of United States 
to accomplish that purpose. That is far better. Each day that passes 
means more risk of the kind of terrible crimes that we saw in the 
killing of scores of Israelis and the wounding of many, many more.
  This is what we are talking about. The best interests of Israel, the 
best interests of the Palestinians, and the best interests of the 
United States are found most powerfully in the resolution of the 
controversies there. These controversies create bitter and angry people 
who are going to engage in terrorist activities and are the real risk 
to the people of the world, and to world peace.
  I am surprised that my colleagues are not more publicly aware of 
this. We are not talking for or against Israel. We are not talking for 
or against the Palestinians. We are talking about two things: one, 
peace; and, two, a process which has to be bottomed on justice and a 
sense of justice by all of the parties in the area.
  I do not know what I have to do to have my colleagues here understand

[[Page 24034]]

that the interest of the United States will never be served by the 
conflict which exists in the Middle East, or what I have to do to have 
my colleagues understand that this kind of Resolution really does 
nothing to resolve those kinds of problems, or to make my colleagues 
understand that peace and security for Israel or the United States or 
Palestine lies only in one thing and that is a negotiated settlement in 
which they have come to an agreement themselves. This is something 
which can only be forced by the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, I see nothing of that kind moving forward in this 
discussion. I see only further actions taken by the United States to 
continue what is going on now, to see the killings in Israel going on, 
to see frustrated, angry people going out to commit suicide just to 
kill a few people that they hate, lets understand that this is a risk 
which has already visited the United States on September 11. To begin 
to force the peace process to work is the one interest that we should 
discuss in the United States today. Regretably we are not doing so.
  We could be discussing how we are going to bring these people to the 
table. I have heard a rich abundance of denunciation of Mr. Arafat. I 
remind all here I do not rise to defend Mr. Arafat, but he is the 
leader of the Palestinian people. We have none other to do this and no 
assurance that his successor will be more able or compliant.
  Killings going on, and innocent people on both sides, Israelis, 
Palestinians and others, are being killed. I have heard great concern 
about the Israelis, and I share that concern. What happened the other 
day is terrible, it is criminal and indefensible. I have heard very 
little about what has transpired with the Palestinians. And I have 
heard even less of an awareness in this body. The failure of the United 
States to address this matter vigorously and to see to it that the root 
causes and the differences of the Israeli people and the people of the 
occupied territories are negotiated away is a real interest of the 
United States which must be addressed.
  Why is it that there are so few in this body that cannot understand 
that? Why is it that we are debating the faults of Mr. Arafat unless we 
have a better alternative and a better leader acceptable to the 
Palestinian people. Why is it that we are failing to discuss peace and 
a really meaningful way of achieving that peace?
  That is the end to terrorism and killing. That is the beginning of 
peace for Israel. It is a beginning of an end to the sorrows and 
misfortunes of the Israelis. It is also a beginning of an end to the 
sorrows and the travails that are felt by the Palestinian people.
  We should be discussing these matters, and we should begin to set a 
policy in the United States where we are forcibly going to address 
these concerns and where we are finally taking meaningful action to 
ensure lasting peace.
  I am not asking my colleagues to embark on an easy trip. I am asking 
them to look to find what alternative there are and then to join me and 
other decent people in an American effort to bring peace to the Middle 
East for the Israelis, and for the people of the occupied territories. 
We must assure we do this while we still have friends who are leading 
countries in the area and while we still bring all parties to the table 
to commence a meaningful and strong effort for peace.
  I ask with each passing day, does the cause of peace get stronger 
with the killing of innocent Israelis in Israel or the killing of 
innocent Palestinians in the occupied territories? Do the frustrations 
and angers and the bitterness and the hate that is building over there 
add a single thing to our prospects for peace? I suggest not. I do 
suggest that we commence the beginning of a meaningful process forced 
with every effort that this country can put into it to abate this 
terrible situation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to visit Israel and meet with 
the leaders and also meet with Chairman Arafat both in 1995 and 1999. 
In the times I was there and even up until last year, the United States 
was engaged in the peace process to the point of putting the prestige 
of this country and the Presidency to try to bring peace to Israel and 
the Palestinian question.
  What happened, though, was that Chairman Arafat walked away. Whatever 
the reason, all of the reports from the United States is that he walked 
away from a peace process. The Government of Israel changed in response 
to that; and, of course, now we have been in the latest infatada with 
the loss of lives on both sides.
  I add my voice in support for this resolution because as we see the 
loss of innocent life in Israel it condemns terrorism, whether it is on 
the street of New York, on the streets of Washington, or in Ben Yehuda 
in Jerusalem. Our country is at war because of terrorism. We lost 
thousands of people because of terrorism. Killing and injuring innocent 
people should be stopped, and it should be stopped whether it is 
Washington, New York, or Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.
  Our friendship with Israel has not even been considered. We have been 
a friend of Israel for many years, and that is strong. There is no way 
we can condone or encourage or be silent in the loss of the innocent 
people that happened this last weekend.
  I have an opportunity to walk the streets of Jerusalem at the very 
spot those bombs went off, and I think this resolution is mild compared 
to what should be done. I am proud of this Congress and the President 
of the United States in condemning the terrorism, again whether it is 
here in our country or anywhere in the world.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding me this time and for his excellent leadership on the question 
before us today.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly condemn the horror that was inflicted upon 
innocent Israeli men, women and children by suicide bombers. I condemn 
that violence at all times and all places.
  I think it is important to note that we can either oppose or vote 
present on this resolution today and still be considered a supporter of 
the State of Israel and a friend of Israel and a supporter of the long-
standing relationship between the United States and Israel, and do not 
let any outside group in this town try to characterize Members in any 
other way, because it is possible.
  Secretary Powell said it best when he phoned Chairman Arafat after 
the latest bombings and said this was an attack upon Arafat's authority 
as well as an attack upon innocent men, women and children. I think 
that has been lost today. In all of the demands that Arafat must go, we 
have lost sight that these suicide bombers were indeed attacking 
Chairman Arafat himself.
  As I condemn the horror of the past weekend, I strongly condemn the 
horror that has been inflicted upon innocent Palestinians, men, women 
and children, carried out by the Israeli Occupation Forces, including, 
within the last 2 weeks, five innocent Palestinian schoolboys killed in 
the Gaza refugee camp just within the last 2 weeks. Such terror, such 
disproportionate use of power and force, continued humiliation, 
demolition of homes and one's livelihood by destroying their crops on 
their own land, such daily restriction of one's movements of the 
Palestinians by the Israeli Defense Forces, and I could go on and on, 
all of which have been accelerated over the past 14 to 15 months, but 
all of these events, both sides should be just as equally deplored by 
those concerned about human rights abuses around the world, about 
fairness and about peace. Every one of these attacks should be 
condemned.
  Some in the Israeli government obviously very clearly by their own 
words want to get Arafat. Some statements today have alluded very 
strongly to the

[[Page 24035]]

fact that we have got to get Arafat. But such action, indeed such 
action as this resolution today and those that call for Arafat's 
demise, will do zero, will do nothing to reach that just peace and may 
even exacerbate and take us backward from achieving that just peace 
that we all want to achieve.
  Getting Arafat is no solution. Continued humiliation is no solution. 
This is the method of operation of bullies, not of those who want to 
return to the peace process, to the negotiating table, where, as any 
individual involved in negotiations knows, each party has to give a 
little. There is a give and take in the negotiating process. Is that 
the real fear here?
  The military option will not secure a peace in the Middle East. The 
military option will not work. No peace can be achieved; and indeed, as 
I read through this resolution, and there are good points in this 
resolution about condemning terrorism, but I fail to find the word 
``peace'' mentioned once in this resolution. Peace.

                              {time}  1445

  Peace. Maybe I need to read it without my glasses, but I have not 
found the word ``peace'' mentioned once in this resolution before us 
today.
  Now, it is all good, or some of it is good, not all good, but some of 
it is good. Yes, prosecute such terrorists. Provide them with the 
stiffest possible punishment. Yes, ensure that they remain in custody.
  Well, my question is, the Israelis today are bombing all the 
Palestinian police stations, their security operations. Where is Arafat 
going to keep those he arrests, in the living room by the fireplace in 
his home? So the Israelis are making it impossible to fulfill the 
demands that are being placed upon Arafat in this resolution today.
  What if every demand in this resolution were met by 9 o'clock 
tomorrow morning? Would that end terrorism? Would we have peace?
  Indeed, I might announce to my colleagues, as we speak, an 
announcement has been reached of a cease-fire, a 12-hour cease-fire, 
just announced between Chairman Arafat and the Israelis; and he has 
until whatever the 12-hour expiration time is to arrest certain 
militants. So let us let the parties work their will.
  So, let us look at the consequences of our actions here today, and, 
indeed, actions of this body, regardless of whether they have the force 
of law or not, which this, of course, does not. But they do send a 
message to the participants in the Middle East.
  I have traveled the region enough, extensively, including less than 2 
weeks ago, having met with Chairman Arafat, President Mubarak, the 
Prime Minister of Lebanon, President Assad of Syria; and I know that 
they get a wrong signal when we pass resolutions of this nature.
  So I say to my colleagues, let us truly get at the roots of 
terrorism. We know the causes of hatred in this part of the world. 
Secretary Powell said it in his speech of November 19. The occupation 
must end. The occupation must end, the continued expansion and building 
of new settlements. That is confiscation of Palestinian land.
  Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues, please understand, that is the 
root of the problem here. That is what we should be addressing in this 
very good debate. And I commend all sides for conducting this debate 
today. But let us not ignore the true roots of the problem, if we 
indeed want to restart the peace process.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, one of the issues that seems to be at 
the heart of one of the discussions going on here today is whether or 
not the terrorism which we are condemning in this resolution, which I 
support wholeheartedly, is intentional, which we understand, but 
whether or not those actions on the part of the Israeli Government 
which result in the death of noncombatants, whether that is just 
collateral damage.
  The gentleman has been in the Middle East many times and knows many 
of the players. From a firsthand point of view, does the gentleman 
believe that the damage that is being done to noncombatants by the 
Israeli army is unintentional?
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman asks a 
good question; and certainly in the eyes of many in the region, those 
who suffer from this infliction of horror, their answer would be yes, 
that it is intentional. That would be their response. That is something 
we must understand from our perspective, if we truly want to end the 
horror and the violence that comes from all sides. Indeed, there is no 
side that is lily white in the Middle East. Make no mistake about it, 
we must truly look at the causes of terrorism.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, closing the debate on our side, there is no moral 
equivalence between terrorists and the victims of terrorism. What this 
resolution does, and I am proud to join the gentleman from Illinois 
(Chairman Hyde) in being the principal sponsor of this resolution, what 
this resolution does is it expresses the solidarity of the American 
people who were victims of terrorism on September 11 with the people of 
Israel who were victims again just this past weekend.
  We want peace, but we will not get to peace as long as there is an 
attempt to create a moral equivalence between a corrupt dictatorship 
and its terrorist tactics and the democratic ally of the United States.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, it is hard to help my colleagues understand the defect 
of this legislation, which is that it takes sides. It does this in a 
way which does not need to be taken, in a fashion and at a time when it 
is not in our National interest.
  I condemn terrorism, and I condemn the killing of the innocent 
Israelis in Israel just recently, just as I do the killing of thousands 
of Americans on September 11. The roots of the events were somewhat the 
same: frustration, anger, ill will, hatred, and all of the things that 
are generated by the kind of situation that has gone on too long in the 
Middle East.
  These are events which are not blameable on one person or another, 
and I do not believe that the blood of the small Palestinian boy who 
died in his father's arms from Israeli gunfire is any more pleasing in 
the eye of the almighty God than is the death of the scores of Israelis 
who died the other day in Israel because of a terrorist bomb. But those 
are really not the questions that we should be addressing here.
  I just want my colleagues to keep this in mind: if the problems of 
the Mideast are to be resolved and if peace is to be achieved there, it 
is going to take an enormous effort by the United States and by every 
other peace loving Nation. I would note to my colleagues that it is not 
done by attacking other Members of this body because of their concern, 
and it is not done by rejecting the opportunity to use different people 
who are major players in that area.
  If we are to succeed, we must call on everyone, the Israeli 
leadership, Yasar Arafat, the Palestinians, the people of Israel, the 
people of the United States, Lebanon and the countries like Jordan and 
Egypt, to help get their assistance in bringing about a viable, lasting 
peace, negotiated between the parties. We will also need the help of 
other countries in Africa, Europe, Asia and the two American 
continents.
  I see nothing of that kind in this resolution. This resolution, as 
the gentleman from West Virginia mentioned, does not even use the word 
``peace.'' This is what we should be talking about if we are really 
interested in serving the best interests of the United States. Peace, 
peace in the Middle East, peace with dignity and honor and respect, for 
and from all of the parties of that unfortunate area, and how we are to 
achieve it for all.
  That is our interest. And that is what we should be addressing. We 
cannot

[[Page 24036]]

gain anything by castigating or criticizing anyone here, or elsewhere. 
Our role must be that of an honest impartial broker. We must travel the 
long and hard path for peace; and we must start it now, not tomorrow, 
not sometime in the future. And we must do it by making the parties 
negotiate these differences out themselves, so that there can be 
contentment and peace and security in Israel, but also in the occupied 
territories; so no longer is there frustration, hunger, unemployment, 
misfortune in the occupied territories, and so no longer is there risk 
of death and destruction in Israel. That is what the interests of the 
United States should be and calls upon us to do. We do not serve our 
country well if we fail to start this effort--Now! And with great 
resolve.
  The passing of a resolution of this kind simply shows the Arab people 
that the United States again is taking sides in a confrontation. It is 
not in the interests of this country to take sides. It is in the 
interests of this country to be an honest broker, who can be trusted by 
all of the parties there, because securing peace can only be done by 
the efforts of the United States leading the peace loving Nations of 
the world in a great and difficult effort. The bombing and killing by 
suicide bombers is not going to get peace. The rockets and missiles and 
helicopter attacks by the Israelis are going to achieve nothing. Nor 
will suicide bombing by terrorists. The only solution to this is 
negotiations between the parties to resolve the issues.
  Why is it that my colleagues do not understand this simple fact. Why 
are we not here talking about how we remove the root causes of trouble 
and get down to the business of bringing about a real and lasting peace 
that benefits all of the people of the area and benefits the interests 
of the United States? That is the question we should be asking.
  Taking sides benefits us not at all, but getting lasting peace does. 
This is not the way to get lasting peace. This is simply the way to 
alienate more people in the area and cause ourselves more enemies, more 
trouble, more risk, more peril, more killings, more misfortune for 
Israelis and Palestinians alike, and a longer time to achieve peace.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). The gentleman from Illinois is 
recognized for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, well, this has been a stimulating debate, and 
it has been educational. I would like to respond as much as I can to 
some of the critics of the resolution.
  My good friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), describes 
a resolution which my resolution never was. He wants to head it in the 
direction of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East, something that 
has eluded some of the finest minds in the world for hundreds of years, 
certainly since 1948 with the founding of Israel. Many, many people, 
including the former President of the United States, spent hours and 
hours with the parties trying to get peace. Everybody is for peace; but 
in the words of Patrick Henry, ``Peace, peace, there is no peace.''
  So, I did not pretend, I was not arrogant enough to decide I would 
set out a formula for peace. If I could do that, I certainly would do 
it. All I am trying to do is respond to the famous lines in Arthur 
Miller's play, ``Death of a Salesman,'' where Willie Loman's wife, 
Linda, says, ``A man is dying. Attention must be paid.'' Attention must 
be paid to what is going on in Israel.
  How would you like to be a mother, and every day wonder if your 
little girl going to school will come home with all her limbs, with her 
life? It is a hellish way to live. I simply was trying to call 
attention to the horror, the indescribable horror of acts of terrorism, 
and show solidarity as a co-victim of horrible acts of terrorism. It is 
American to put your arms around a fellow democracy and not turn your 
back on them in their hour of need. That is what we were doing.
  This simply says that when acts of terror occur, attention must be 
paid. It must be pointed out. We must shout about it, we must make an 
example of it, we must show the world the horror of what is going on. 
And maybe, just maybe, one day we will all get so sick of it we will 
not tolerate it anymore.
  The gentleman from Michigan sets up a straw man. Not one word about 
peace. Everything we do is about peace, and objecting to terrorism is 
about peace, and showing solidarity to the Israeli people and to the 
Palestinian people.
  The next time, if any, there is an atrocity, an act of terror by the 
State of Israel, bring a resolution to the floor. We will debate it. We 
will debate it. But I have not heard one. I have not seen one. Bring it 
to the floor and let us debate it.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman just mentioned the Palestinian 
people. I wonder if that was mentioned in the resolution, expressing 
the concern for their plight as well. I wonder if that was in the 
resolution and I happened to overlook it.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the Palestinian 
involvement in the atrocity of last Saturday is mentioned, because this 
focuses on what happened in Jerusalem, when 26 women and children and 
men were killed and 1,200 were injured. That is what we are talking 
about.
  Mr. Speaker, support our expression of solidarity with the victims of 
this horrible act of terrorism. Support the resolution.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) be granted 2 additional minutes, because the 
gentleman mentioned me and I would like to have his attention on that 
matter.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I do not propose to rebut what my dear and 
valued friend has said about me. I do not remember setting up a straw 
man, but I would like to say the gentleman has mentioned H. Con. Res. 
253 which I sponsored earlier and with which the gentleman has 
suggested a great deal of sympathy. I wonder if maybe the committee 
could bring that proposal to the floor. It is a fair and even-handed 
statement. It is supported by the administration. It urges that the 
United States have as its policy the carrying forward of the Mitchell 
report. Why is it that we cannot have something like that before us?
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I have no idea. If the staff will bring it to 
my attention, we will give it the most careful scrutiny. The gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lantos) and I will do it together.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted to have the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) 
put that bill on the floor so that perhaps we could be together on 
something that is in the interest of the United States.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, it would also be a pleasure to be with the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell).
  Mr. WAXMAN. I rise in strong support for H. Con. Res. 280 and join my 
colleagues in condemning Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian terrorists 
responsible for the massacre of innocent Israeli civilians.
  In the past six months alone, Hamas suicide bombers have murdered 
teenagers at the discotheque in Tel Aviv, commuters on a rush hour bus 
ride in Haifa, pedestrians at a busy intersection in Afula, families 
eating lunch at a pizza store in Jerusalem, and a street filled with 
young Israelis and Americans out for a Saturday night in the heart of 
the nation's capital.
  On a daily basis, the Tanzim and Force 17, Yasser Arafat's Fatah 
paramilitary forces, shoot at Israeli motorists on their way to work, 
school, or returning to their homes.
  Instead of arresting, prosecuting, and outlawing these terrorists, 
Yasser Arafat has deliberately given them free reign, safe harbor,

[[Page 24037]]

and license to organize and carry out heinous attacks. Instead of 
condemning anti-Israel incitement in Palestinian media, schools, and 
mosques, he has contributed the free flow of hatred that seeks to 
legitimize violence. And in doing so, he has turned the Palestinian 
Authority into nothing short of the Taliban.
  The horrific events of September 11 have tragically brought home to 
all Americans the terrorism that Israel has long been suffering. Our 
solidarity has never been stronger or more important.
  Now more than ever, we must renew the common purpose, strategic goals 
and democratic ideals that are the cement of strong U.S.-Israel 
relations. We must join together with Israel in defending our citizens, 
our values, and our future from the shadow of terrorism.
  That is why this resolution determines that the United States should 
break off all diplomatic relations with the Palestinian Authority 
unless immediate action is taken to destroy the Palestinian terrorist 
network and arrest the perpetrators of these terrorist crimes.
  Yasser Arafat must be held accountable, and there is no reason to 
contemplate the creation of a Palestinian state unless he can 
demonstrate that the terrorism will end. So far he has been unwilling 
to achieve this for even seven days, giving neither Israel nor the 
United States reason to be confident that he has the will or ability to 
do so permanently.
  But one thing is certain--Israel as a sovereign nation has the right 
to take all measures necessary to defend its citizens, and it is in the 
interest of the United States to support its ability to do so.
  Now is the time for us to pressure Yasser Arafat to crush the 
terrorist networks within his grasp, and urge all civilized nations of 
the world to abandon the ongoing efforts by Arab and Islamic states to 
isolate Israel in this time of crisis.
  Just hours ago in Geneva, an international conference convened to 
condemn Israel for violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which 
was adopted in response to Nazi atrocities during the Holocaust. The 
agenda included biased determinations on the final status of Jerusalem, 
Palestinian refugees, and the imposition of a United Nations observer 
force.
  Only yesterday, the U.N. General Assembly overwhelming voted for 
resolutions advocating the creation of a Palestinian state, Israeli 
withdrawal from the Golan Heights, and rejecting Jerusalem's status as 
the capital of Israel as ``illegal and therefore null and void.''
  These one-sided determinations are irresponsible and 
counterproductive. They devastate the constructive role the 
international community could play in ending the violence and terrorism 
that have taken so many American and Israeli lives.
  I commend the Administration for staunchly opposing these forums, and 
I applaud its actions yesterday to freeze the assets of the charities 
and banks raising funds in the United States to support the terrorist 
activities Hamas and other Palestinian groups.
  Today we must do more. We must pass H. Con. Res. 280 and let Yasser 
Arafat and the Palestinian terrorist organizations know that there is a 
line that separates outlaws from the rest of civilized society and they 
have crossed it.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House 
Concurrent Resolution 280, and urge all members to vote in support of 
this measure that expresses our solidarity with the people of Israel at 
this difficult time.
  Now we know; now we understand. As Americans, we know. We see the 
people running down the street in panic and it looks all too familiar. 
Now we know.
  We hear the sirens and see the dead and injured, and as much as 
thought we knew, now we know.
  We sometimes joked about Israelis and their cell phone, and now we 
know how it must feel to wait for the call from your teenager who is 
out for the evening with friends saying, ``Mom, I'm OK,'' or just 
waiting for that call.
  We now know the rage and frustrations of being attacked by those who 
prefer to die than live, and who plot and scheme to take innocent life 
with them.
  We now know the courage and determination it takes to ``just live 
your life'' when ``just going shopping, out to eat or riding the bus 
can be life threatening.
  And while hopefully we will not know what it is like to live for half 
a century and more on constant high alert, we understand better now 
intolerable that must be.
  And now that it happened to here, in a place many believed was immune 
to such an attack, we know that terrorists must be answered, and those 
who harbor or support terrorists must be held accountable.
  And we know, as we pray for peace, leave space for peace, continue to 
work for the miracle of peace in this holiday season, we know that we 
must defend ourselves and our children.
  And we know, as Americans who love Israel, that as people, as a 
community, and as nations we must be united more than ever before in 
defense of that tiny and precious plot of land, surrounded day in and 
day out by hatred and danger, where our brothers and sisters want only 
one thing, and that is to live in peace and freedom.
  I commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lantos) for introducing this important measure and 
I urge all of my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 280. 
Like the recent attacks on our country, the terrorist bombings in 
Israel are horrific. Once again innocent civilians have been brutally 
murdered by terrorists. Israel is a democracy under siege. As the 
world's leading democracy the United States cannot, in good conscience, 
stand idly by while a democratic ally is being brutally attached by 
evildoers.
  For too long the Palestinian Authority has preached peace while 
terrorists use its territory as a safe haven. Even after President Bush 
endorsed the idea of a Palestinian state the attacks continued. If the 
Palestinian Authority wants to be a government it must act like one by 
stopping these suicide bombings from being planned and launched from 
its territory. The Palestinian Authority's leader, Yasser Arafat, has 
condemned the attacks. But he has done so before and the attacks 
against Israel continue. Chairman Arafat must do more than offer 
sympathetic remarks. I applaud and support President Bush's response 
and hope that Chairman Arafat's actions will back up his words and stop 
these attacks.
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 
280, which extends our deepest sympathies to the people of Israel for 
the recent string of deadly terrorist attacks in their nation and 
expresses our sense of solidarity with them in this difficult time.
  The people of Israel have long had to live with terror on their 
street, and the world has largely stood by and felt great sympathy but 
little need to act upon it. But these attacks come at a time of 
heightened awareness around the globe of the necessary of riding our 
communities of the evil face of terrorism. Peaceful people have been 
made prisoners in their own communities by those who give no thought to 
the deadly consequences of their actions and who spread venomous hatred 
for their fellow man.
  On September 11th, those free and peaceful people said with one 
resounding voice that they would no longer allow that kind of evil to 
destroy our world.
  The war against terrorism is not America's war alone. It is a fight 
that we lead for freedom-loving people everywhere. Though there may be 
fewer dead and less extensive damage, the horrific attacks that 
occurred over a 14-hour period this weekend in Israel are no less 
atrocious than the attacks our nation suffered on September 11th. The 
mothers and fathers who lost their children in each of those attacks 
cry the same tears and feel the same pain.
  We, as a nation, must stand beside our friend, Israel, in this time 
of need and support her in the fight to provide a prosperous, peaceful, 
and secure future for her people. I urge my colleagues to support 
Israel by supporting this resolution.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of H. Con. 
Res. 280, of which I am a cosponsor.
  On Saturday, December 1st, suicide bombers killed 10 teenage Israelis 
and wounded more than 150 others in downtown Jerusalem. On Sunday 
morning, just 14 hours after the first horrific attack, a suicide 
bomber boarded a local bus route in the northern port city of Haifa, 
killing 15 and wounding 35. The victims of these attacks range in age 
from 14 to 75; they include students, senior citizens, and a Filipino 
nanny. The terrorist organization Hamas claimed responsibility for 
their cowardly attacks.
  Since September 11th, international attention has been deflected from 
the everyday acts of violence in Israel to the United States' war on 
terrorism. Recently President Bush brought the Arab-Israeli conflict 
back under public purview by sending U.S. peace envoy General Anthony 
Zinni to the region to promote a cease-fire and possible resumption of 
peace talks.
  When Palestinian terrorists killed 26 and wounded 175 Israelis within 
a matter of 24 hours, Palestinian Authority Chairman Arafat's 
commitment to find and prosecute terrorists was called into question, 
and Israel subsequently launched its own war against terrorism. Twenty-
four hours after the suicide

[[Page 24038]]

bombing in Haifa, and 36 hours after the bombings in Jerusalem, Israel 
retaliated against the Palestinian Authority by bombing chairman Yasser 
Arafat's headquarters in Gaza Strip, and police buildings in the West 
Bank town of Jenin.
  I rise in agreement with Prime Minister Sharon and President Bush. As 
the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat has on more 
than one occasion voiced his commitment to peace, and his desire to 
fight terrorism. Yet words alone are not enough; they necessitate 
action. Yasser Arafat must take an active and responsible role in 
tracking and arresting those involved in terrorist activities. As the 
leader of the Palestinian people, Yasser Arafat must utilize his power 
to reign in the extraneous terrorist factions that continue to lash out 
at innocent Israeli civilians.
  This resolution, H. Con. Res. 280, holds Arafat responsible for the 
actions of all his people, including Palestinian terrorists. It 
expresses the United States' solidarity with Israel during this 
difficult and emotional time. Now, more than ever, we must stand strong 
with our democratic allies to fight terrorist groups worldwide.
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today, I voted ``present'' on this 
Concurrent Resolution because it is my belief that the United States 
through the House of Representatives should remain a fair and honest 
broker in the Middle East. At a time when hostilities in the Middle 
East are escalating and all parties are looking to American officials 
to negotiate a fair and equitable solution, I believe that this 
Resolution is ill timed and diminishes the credibility of the 
negotiation process. It is imperative that all steps we take in this 
House secure our position as an impartial broker in the Middle East and 
this measure does not do this.
  Make no mistake. I stand against terrorism and the killing of 
innocent civilians such as those that occurred in Israel this past 
weekend. I condemn them wholeheartedly. Both sides in the conflict, 
however, have the blood of innocents on their hands. Both sides in this 
conflict must make extraordinary and concerted efforts to come to the 
negotiating table and resolve the problems of the region. I support the 
findings of the Mitchell-Tenet Commission, which recommended that 
Congress not approve such resolutions. I regret that Congress is 
ignoring that recommendation. By doing so, the action of this chamber 
only serves to prolong the hostilities in that region and discourages 
both sides from engaging in the negotiation process. I strongly urge 
the parties to cease hostilities and do all they can to move forward 
with the Mitchell-Tenet recommendations.
  Mr. Hyde, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution H. Con. Res. 
280.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________