[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 25377-25379]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to address the valiant efforts 
of our men and women serving overseas in Iraq. Their service for our 
country is very close to my heart because I, like thousands of other 
American parents across the United States, have a son who is fighting 
for the cause of freedom in Iraq.
  Like every American, and especially for those of us with loved ones 
who are fighting overseas, I have carefully considered our actions in 
Iraq, and I am as committed to staying the course today as I was when I 
voted to authorize hostile action less than 3 years ago.
  Today, we see the wreckage of roadside bombs plastered across our 
media screens. We are constantly bombarded by a daily media barrage of 
every hint of bad news in Iraq. The old adage, ``If it bleeds, it 
leads,'' seems to be in full effect.
  What about the good that is happening as a result of our efforts? I 
can tell you this is the greatest concern our men and women in Iraq 
have. They are doing good work, they are making progress, but they 
don't hear any of the good things that are going on. This is 
disheartening, as are some of the comments made by a few in the United 
States who say they are not doing a good job, who denigrate their 
efforts. We owe them better than that. I could cite for you letters I 
have seen written to newspapers in my State by men who have served in 
Iraq saying precisely this.
  Has there been any progress made toward democracy this year? The 
Iraqis themselves answered yes, resoundingly, when last month, on 
October 15, an overwhelming majority of Iraqis voted peacefully to lay 
the foundation for their country with a national constitution. Ten days 
later, on October 25, the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq 
announced the approval of a constitution and stated that it had found 
no evidence of significant voter fraud, as some had alleged.
  The United Nations also participated in the referendum process and 
concurred with the Commission's conclusions. On the day of the vote, 
Sunni protests were minimal, with no violence reported. Not only did 
the referendum pass with 15 of 18 provinces providing a majority 
``yes'' vote, but all governorates recorded a high voter turnout, the 
likes of which would put many of our voter districts in America to 
shame. I can tell you from personal reports that in Sunni areas, Sunnis 
were going out in record numbers to register. They were registering at 
registration places protected solely by Iraqi security forces without 
any violence against them.
  When we look at the election results, the Kurds in Dahuk posted an 
86-percent turnout, while the Shi'a in Karbala and Najaf posted a 57-
percent turnout. But let's consider the Sunni areas where critics say 
we are making so little progress toward democracy.
  Let's compare the percentage of voter turnout from last January's 
elections to the October referendum last

[[Page 25378]]

month. In Anbar, voter turnout rose from 2 percent to 40 percent; in 
Diyala, from 33 percent to 67 percent; in Nayniwah, from 17 percent to 
54 percent; and in Salahaldin, from 29 percent to 91 percent.
  Only two of those governorates voted overwhelmingly against the 
referendum, and all of them saw record numbers of citizens exercising 
their voices at the polls.
  This, Mr. President, is progress toward democracy. Have we forgotten 
that under Saddam, the Iraqi people had no vote, no opportunity to 
express themselves?
  I am not discouraged, as the critics say we should be, that there was 
not near universal agreement on the referendum in Iraq. We have had a 
hard enough time in our own country, the world's model for democracy, 
in achieving overwhelming agreement on anything. And certainly this 
body with its recent record of activity shows that democracies often 
generate strong disagreements. The only time a national vote purports 
to show universal agreement is when the election is held under the 
tight control and dictation of a dictator such as Saddam Hussein.
  So how do the critics explain this massive increase in voter turnout 
and still maintain that democracy is dead in the water in Iraq, when 
the people of Iraq for the first time in centuries now have a voice and 
a common marketplace of ideas in which to express themselves? And why 
isn't more attention given to the progress in Iraq for which our sons 
and daughters overseas are fighting?
  As for the media, it is my belief that the greatest threat to our 
efforts in Iraq today is the enemy's ability to manipulate press 
coverage of the conflict in order to influence U.S. public opinion to 
force a premature withdrawal of our forces.
  Last month, I spoke on the floor of the Senate about the acquisition 
of a letter written by Osama bin Laden's principal deputy, Ayman al-
Zawahiri, to al-Qaida's foremost lieutenant on the ground in Iraq, Abu 
Mus'ab al-Zarqawi. The letter underscored that al-Qaida will not relent 
in pursuing its Sunni Islamo-fascist, extremist agenda, and it revealed 
al-Qaida views its jihad in Iraq as the focal point in its effort to 
establish a worldwide neofascist global caliphate. Zawahiri's recipe 
for creating this Sunni extremist state is in this order: evict the 
Americans from Iraq, create an Islamic extremist state in Iraq, swallow 
up Iraq's neighbors and then destroy Israel, and from there go on to 
bigger and better things. And how did Zawahiri advise Zarqawi to 
achieve these goals? By augmenting his terror campaign with political 
warfare and by manipulating the media. Zawahiri urged Zarqawi to tone 
down egregious actions, such as beheadings, because they do not play 
well on television screens. He approved of the violence but cautioned 
him to execute Americans with a bullet to the head instead. Isn't that 
nice of him?
  The Zawahiri letter so clearly unveils the insidious nature of this 
clever enemy we are up against. Therefore, I urge every American with 
access to the Internet to read the letter. Go to the Web site 
www.dni.gov, and look under ``News Releases.'' But Americans shouldn't 
have to go to a Web site to discover its content. It should have been 
dissected in painstaking detail on the nightly news or at least given a 
fraction of the time allotted to the critical coverage of the war.
  It amazes me how there is such a blinding skepticism about anything 
that supports our effort in Iraq today. Last week, my staff spoke to a 
respected scholar in London about what he thought about the Zawahiri 
letter. He said it must have been a fabrication. When asked what 
evidence he had for that assertion, he responded: None, but it just 
makes Bush's case, so the letter can't be genuine.
  As a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I can 
tell you that we have absolutely no indication at all this letter was a 
fabrication. So I ask again, why isn't the media delving into this?
  We ought to take a brief look at the nature of the enemy we are 
fighting in Iraq. I believe President Bush said it well last week 
during his speech in Norfolk when he called their evil form of Islamic 
radicalism Islamo-fascism.
  We are fighting a radical ideology that has crept up over the past 
few decades that is taking hold in countries around the world. We see 
it in Palestine, in Indonesia, the Philippines and, yes, now even in 
Europe. For the past week, we have seen the signs of it with riots 
outside Paris. Rioters burned areas of the country for over a week, 
lashing out against the Western society in which they live. Arab 
experts explain the violence as an identity problem among young Arabs 
who see themselves first as Muslims looking for a country of their own, 
rather than French, English, or American citizens.
  Al-Qaida preys on such youth, encourages their unjustified acts of 
violence, and is now telling them that their new home will be in Iraq. 
This is why in Iraq today we see so many foreign fighters flocking to a 
radical cause. An insurgent fights within his country's borders to 
defend it from occupation or to oust a government with which he does 
not agree. This is the definition of an insurgent. A terrorist is one 
who travels outside his country to wage politically motivated violence 
elsewhere.
  While there remain many Sunni Baathist insurgents who would like to 
bring back Saddam, there is an ever growing and a proportionally lethal 
number of terrorists flooding into Iraq to fight what they see as the 
ultimate jihad, identified as their extremist neofascist interpretation 
of Islam.
  These are the terrorists who are fueling simmering insurgencies. 
These are truly the Islamofascists. Iraq has become the epic battle 
with the West that al-Qaida has been looking for and we must win it. We 
cannot afford to lose. This enemy cannot be negotiated with and will 
never reform its ways or be deterred from its path of violence. The 
only option we have with such an enemy who wants to slaughter American 
men, women, and children is to eliminate them.
  Last week former President Jimmy Carter appeared on ``Larry King 
Live'' and criticized President Bush for his policy of preemption in 
the war on terror. He claimed this policy was a break in U.S. national 
policy from all previous Presidents and administrations. Therefore, he 
declared our actions in Iraq radical.
  It is radical precisely because we find ourselves in dire 
circumstances. It is a break from the past because in the past we were 
not facing organized, ruthless bands of terrorists with declared 
intentions to annihilate Americans, whose acquisition of weapons of 
mass destruction was a distinct possibility.
  Every student of national security understands that threat equals 
capability plus intent. The intent of the terrorists to annihilate us 
is indisputable, as is their stated intention to acquire weapons of 
mass destruction to do so. Their power is only limited by their current 
capability.
  As David Kay said, in the Iraqi Survey Report which we discussed in 
the Intelligence Committee and has now been released, Iraq, despite our 
inadequate intelligence, was a far more dangerous place even than we 
knew because radical terrorists were running loose in an unorganized 
country that had the potential to produce weapons of mass destruction 
for them.
  We must erode the capability of those terrorists for if we sit back 
and allow it to grow, we will face threats to the future such as we 
have never seen before. Long-distance runners say there comes a time in 
the race when their bodies yearn to succumb to the temptation to give 
up the fight but they must press on. That is when they remind 
themselves of the reasons for their struggle and when they remind 
themselves why they run; they find strength to press on. Only those who 
are resolute and full of conviction win the race. Let us hold to our 
conviction that democracy is better than tyranny, achieving peace is 
worth our struggle, and those who are counting on us in Iraq have a 
reason to hope.
  We must maintain the course and be ready to fight neofascists and 
Islamo-fascism, wherever it exists. Right now it is Iraq, but there are 
other theaters

[[Page 25379]]

as well. Southeast Asia could become one added to the list. Let us 
press on, for only if we do so will we one day win this long distance 
race. It is not a short one, but it is one we cannot afford to lose if 
we want to ensure that we have no more 9/11s or we at least reduce the 
likelihood we will have such tragedy on our shore.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senator from 
Illinois is recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. I ask for the indulgence of the Chair to notify me when I 
have 3 minutes remaining on my statement.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Very well.

                          ____________________