[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 18737-18739]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I found today to be a rather startling 
day by virtue of the news we have heard about what is happening with 
our troops in Iraq, what is happening to those who are in battle, those 
we are asking to carry on the battle for, let me call it, the 
liberation of Iraq, the opportunity to turn that society into a 
democratic society. This was brought to me by virtue of a couple of 
things that happened.
  First, I participated with colleagues in the Governmental Affairs 
Committee markup of intelligence reform. It is a task that I and so 
many others on the committee, and throughout this body, take very 
seriously. We are upset about what happened on 9/11. We just 
commemorated the third anniversary of that horrific day. I went to a 
community in New Jersey, Middletown, NJ, and spoke to a group that 
included survivor families of 9/11. Thirty-seven of their residents 
lost their lives on that terrible day.
  I walked around the memorial walk they established and saw pictures 
placed on granite stones of those who perished, with messages of love 
and longing for fathers who died, for brothers, for sisters, and for 
mothers who were killed that day, murdered. It digs further into the 
searing memory of that fateful day.
  It reminds all of us about what our responsibilities are to try and 
get this country back on an even keel and to stop mourning the loss of 
young people because though we struggled hard to turn out our bill on 
intelligence reform this day, we did not complete it. But there is a 
fair degree of optimism that we will come to at least an initial 
description of what the intelligence-gathering mechanism might be.
  Then this afternoon I heard President Bush say something that I found 
almost incomprehensible, extremely disturbing about our Nation's 
intelligence-gathering system. A few hours after the President spoke at 
the United Nations about why we went it alone in Iraq, President Bush 
was asked by a reporter about a CIA report that he received last month 
on the deteriorating situation--as a matter of fact, I believe it was 
in July--the deteriorating situation in Iraq which could even lead to a 
full-blown civil war.
  The President dismissed the CIA report and said it was ``just 
guessing.'' Just guessing. Imagine, we are over 1,000 deaths, thousands 
of injuries, many of them very serious--if one wants to see how 
serious, go down to Walter Reed Hospital and interview some of those 
who survived these attacks and see how they feel about what is taking 
place.
  We are just guessing? The CIA is just guessing? If the President 
thinks our Nation's intelligence system is just guessing, then we are 
in trouble. The President's comments are a frightening sign that he is 
not living in reality and that he continues to ignore the truth about 
what is happening on the ground in Iraq.
  I am going to quote what the President said this day, September 21:

       The CIA laid out a--several scenarios that said, life could 
     be lousy, life could be OK, life could be better, and they 
     were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like.

  Talk about casual dismissal of the trauma that family after family 
across this country faces. Over 33 former residents of New Jersey paid 
with their lives, all young. When I talk to those families or go to a 
funeral, there is such distress and grief.
  I talked briefly before about these granite markers in a memorial 
built in Middletown, NJ. All of these granite memorials had legends or 
quotes from the family like ``Daddy, I miss you''--quotes that were so 
tender. One said, ``If love could have kept you alive, we would be 
having a good time right now.'' They are the saddest things.

[[Page 18738]]

  The reality is that these are not gravestones. These are granite 
markers done very gracefully throughout a walkway in this park with, 
again, a marble plate on top, an inscription from a family member, and 
a picture of the individual. Several men were pictured in tuxedoes. I 
think the idea was to say that life was so full and so happy for these 
families.
  When we look now at where we are, we see the President suggesting 
that maybe the CIA is just guessing as to what conditions might be 
like. President Bush ignored some intelligence reports he did not like 
before he went to war. Now when intelligence contradicts him, he 
dismisses the content of the report as mere guessing.
  When the Central Intelligence Agency sends the President a report 
that lays out three scenarios for Iraq with the most rosy, the status 
quo, an average of 87 attacks a day against our troops, 1,035 dead to 
date, the President dismisses it as guesses? What an insult to the 
people in our country and to those families. I would like the President 
to stand in front of some of those survivors and say: Your son died. It 
is terrible. We made mistakes. The CIA was just guessing about what 
might be.
  Look at where we are. Look at what is taking place. Today's 
Washington Post has a story about the comments of a general who defends 
the pace of the Iraqi training. Army LTG Walter Sharp, speaking to 
reporters at the Pentagon, also disputed the accuracy of some of the 
Democratic Presidential nominee's new criticism of the pace of training 
for Iraqi police.
  I had the opportunity to visit in March with several other Senators--
Senator Levin of Michigan; Senator Rockefeller of West Virginia; 
Senator Reed, who trained very thoroughly in the military at West 
Point; and Senator Bingaman--and the situation looked grim at that 
time. It was said that we are going to turn over governing to an 
interim council of Iraqis, and then we are going to have a vote in 
January of next year that would determine the more or less permanent 
structure at least for the next term of leadership in the country. Here 
we have these boldfaced statements that say he believes that based on 
what we will be able to do, there will be local control for the 
majority of the country by the end of December. Control is not just a 
matter of having Iraqi security forces in place, but also an assessment 
of the ability of local political leaders to govern and to oversee 
economic reconstruction efforts.
  When I was in Iraq with four of my colleagues and we went to a police 
academy where they were training those who would soon be police 
officers, if memory serves me correctly, the pace was that they would 
train about 80 in 6 weeks. Since they needed over 50,000 more, I did a 
quick calculation and came up with the conclusion that it would be many 
years before they filled the full complement of those necessary. Then 
we find out that a lot of these people are entirely unqualified to take 
these tests: no driver's license, no capacity to read or write, no 
understanding of what the assignment is, a lot of washouts. Then they 
say by January the Iraqis are going to be able to take over? It is not 
fair. It is not fair to say these things because everybody knows it is 
not the truth by any stretch of the imagination.
  The President has to stop ignoring the crisis our troops face in 
Iraq. He has to begin to speak in the real world, with real words, 
where things are not always good, where serious problems need to be 
addressed.
  I find it so offensive that someone who served his country, received 
three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star, and a Bronze Star--now, I wore a 
uniform and I know what those medals mean. They mean a lot. I did not 
earn any, but I tried to do the job I knew best. I served in World War 
II. I was 18 when I enlisted. I know those medals are only given when 
the qualifications are attested to by medical officers who look at a 
wound and say, yes, this wound deserved the recognition of a Purple 
Heart, three of them. And now we want to talk about, well, how deep was 
the wound, was there any blood. When someone loses their hearing in 
battle, maybe there is no blood, but there is no hearing. It is still a 
wound, and a very serious one.
  After going to a funeral of a young man from New Jersey at Arlington 
Cemetery, I went to Walter Reed afterward to meet with some of those 
who had survived battle. There was one young man there who was 
sightless. He was there with his wife, and he said to me: Senator, I 
will not be able to see my 28 month old daughter again, but I just want 
to hold her. He said: I am going to try my best to get along in life. 
It was painful to witness, but imagine how painful it is to be the 
victim.
  It is hypocritical when we compare the service of John Kerry, though 
he was critical after the war, but he had the decency and the courage 
and the honor to serve his country when he was called on to do it. He 
did not question why, he did not question live or die, he said: I will 
do my duty to the best of my ability. The President's record does not 
indicate the same interest in serving. As a matter of fact, I saw a 
reproduction of an application for service in the military that said: I 
do not choose to serve in combat. He checked it off. That is all right. 
Everybody has a right to make those choices. But then to blacken 
someone else's character who did it and try to humiliate that 
individual so that he looks like he is unpatriotic, that he wants 
Saddam Hussein in there? It is atrocious. It is not honest. It is 
scandalous, and that is what is happening.
  I offer a plea. Let President Bush and Vice President Cheney talk 
about what they want to do for the country, talk about when we can see 
an end. They talk about John Kerry not having a plan for getting us out 
of Iraq. Has anybody heard President Bush's plan for getting out of 
Iraq? No one. Smoke and mirrors, the ugliest type. One need only turn 
on the television, pick up the newspaper, listen to the radio and know 
things are falling apart in Iraq. We have heard it confirmed by 
distinguished colleagues from that side of the aisle, people who fought 
bravely, were in battle, know what it is like to see comrades die or 
escape with their lives, wounded in the process. They don't think 
things are going well. Look at the statement of Senator Hagel of a 
couple of days ago, or Senator McCain's statement. We see they see a 
gloomy picture ahead.
  Today saw the second day of beheading of two Americans, savagery the 
likes of which we should never witness--cutting off a man's head.
  I know one thing. This vulgar language has to stop. Shame on the 
President of the United States for belittling the record of someone who 
served so well and who did what he had to do, as his country requested 
it. If he had objections, he had objections, but it was after he 
served. It was after he was wounded three times and after he got the 
Silver Star for valor and after he got the Bronze Star for valor. It 
was afterward, but he served. First he did the thing he had to do. That 
brings a different level of experience than someone who only talks 
about how soft he is on defense. Patriotism? To suggest he is not a 
patriot? To suggest he would rather see Saddam Hussein in place? It is 
outrageous and the American public should not believe it.
  I call on veterans, who belong to whatever association, who served in 
whatever war, whether it was those who are still alive from World War 
I, World War II, Vietnam, Korea: Veterans, stand up and object. Don't 
let them say that about our comrade in arms. Don't let them question 
whether the wound was deep enough. You want to offend 270,000 people 
who got Purple Hearts in Vietnam? Should we go back and remeasure the 
depth of those wounds, see how much blood was let because they were hit 
by enemy fire?
  It is not fair. I hope veterans across this country will disavow that 
kind of talk, that kind of suggestion, that kind of innuendo about 
someone who fought and disagreed with the policy--who first fought and 
then disagreed--in this sinister game being played by those who would 
challenge the heroism in the award of those medals which were certified 
by John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy, and another by the senior 
admiral in charge of the fleet in Vietnam.

[[Page 18739]]

To challenge whether those medals were properly awarded is an outrage.
  I think it is time to face up, tell the truth, discuss the issues and 
stop the name calling. Especially stop the accusation that someone who 
lost three limbs--as in the case of Max Cleland, who was defeated in 
his reelection attempt because it was said that he was soft on 
defense--wasn't patriotic enough. Maybe they were suggesting it is too 
bad he didn't lose the fourth limb. These are outrageous statements.
  No, we cannot conduct ourselves like this. The American people see 
the hypocrisy. What it says is, if you can dismiss the truth and 
replace it with lies, replace it with distortion, replace it with 
insult, that is a way to build character for our young people. I defy 
that kind of performance, that kind of suggestion. It should not 
happen.
  I am disturbed by the fact that two Americans had their heads cut 
off, punishment for something we don't understand. They were trying to 
bring democracy to a country that right now is not prepared for 
democracy. But we insist that that is what they want. Their country is 
being destroyed by insurgents. Their lives are being destroyed. However 
many we have lost, the Iraqis have lost far more.
  The insurgents are intimidating those who would serve in the military 
and the Iraqi force. They are removing the incentive for those who want 
to be in law enforcement. They are totally intimidating those forces 
who would stand up and fight. Yet we continue to paint the rosy 
picture, like the President did a year ago May when he said ``bring 
them on.'' They brought them on, all right. They brought them on as we 
never wanted to see them.
  We have to stop this character assassination and these attacks. I 
hope we can muster the courage to do it in this place.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.

                          ____________________