[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 16138-16144]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1600
CALLING ON UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL TO CHARGE IRANIAN PRESIDENT 
 WITH CERTAIN VIOLATIONS BECAUSE OF HIS CALLS FOR DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL

  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 21) calling on the United Nations 
Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with 
violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the 
Crime of Genocide and the United Nations Charter because of his calls 
for the destruction of the State of Israel, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
  The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 21

       Whereas the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and 
     Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (commonly referred to as 
     the ``Genocide Convention'') defines genocide as, among other 
     things, the act of killing members of a national, ethnic, 
     racial, or religious group with the intent to destroy, in 
     whole or in part, the targeted group, and it also prohibits 
     conspiracy to commit genocide, as well as ``direct and public 
     incitement to commit genocide'';
       Whereas Article 4 of the Genocide Convention provides that 
     individuals committing any of the listed genocidal crimes 
     shall be punished ``whether they are constitutionally 
     responsible rulers, public officials or private 
     individuals'';
       Whereas 133 Member States of the United Nations have 
     ratified the Genocide Convention and thereby pledged to 
     prosecute those individuals who violate its criteria for 
     incitement to commit genocide, as well as those individuals 
     who commit genocide directly;
       Whereas 62 years ago the United Nations was founded in the 
     wake of the Holocaust, the Nazi genocide carried out during 
     World War II that resulted in the slaughter of 6 million Jews 
     in Europe, in order to ``save succeeding generations from the 
     scourge of war'' and uphold and protect the ``dignity and 
     worth of the human person'';
       Whereas Article 2, Section 4, of the United Nations 
     Charter, to which Iran has agreed as a Member State of the 
     United Nations, requires all Member States of the United 
     Nations to ``refrain in their international relations from 
     the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity 
     or political independence of any state'';
       Whereas on October 26, 2005, at the World Without Zionism 
     Conference in Tehran, Iran, Iranian leader Mahmoud 
     Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be ``wiped off the map'', 
     described Israel as ``a disgraceful blot [on] the face of the 
     Islamic world'', and declared that ``[a]nybody who recognizes 
     Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury'';
       Whereas on December 12, 2006, Iranian leader Mahmoud 
     Ahmadinejad addressed a conference in Tehran questioning the 
     historical veracity of the Holocaust and said that Israel 
     would ``soon be wiped out'';
       Whereas on December 15, 2000, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali 
     Khamene'i stated to thousands of Muslim worshippers in Tehran 
     that ``Iran's stance has always been clear on this ugly 
     phenomenon (Israel). We have repeatedly said that this 
     cancerous tumor of a state should be removed from the 
     region'';
       Whereas other Iranian leaders have made similar statements 
     and the Government of Iran has displayed inflammatory symbols 
     that express similar intent;
       Whereas on December 14, 2006, incoming United Nations 
     Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that Iran's calls for 
     Israel's destruction and its dismissal of the Holocaust are 
     ``unacceptable'', and expressed concern about the regional 
     and global security implications of Tehran's nuclear program;
       Whereas on August 3, 2006, in a speech during an emergency 
     meeting of Muslim leaders, Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad 
     stated that the Middle East would be better off ``without the 
     existence of the Zionist regime'', called Israel an 
     ``illegitimate regime'' with ``no legal basis for its 
     existence'', and accused the United States of using Israel as 
     a proxy to control the region and its oil resources;
       Whereas Iran funds, trains, and openly supports terrorist 
     groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad among 
     many others, all of which have murdered Americans, Israelis, 
     and non-Israeli Jews and are determined to destroy Israel;
       Whereas on December 14, 2001, former leader of Iran and 
     current leader of Iran's influential Expediency Council Ali 
     Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani threatened Israel with destruction 
     by nuclear attack, saying, ``[i]f one day, the Islamic world 
     is also equipped

[[Page 16139]]

     with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the 
     imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the 
     use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy 
     everything [in Israel], while it will merely harm the Islamic 
     world'';
       Whereas Iran has aggressively pursued a clandestine effort 
     to arm itself with nuclear weapons; and
       Whereas the longstanding policy of the Iranian regime is 
     aimed at destroying the democratic State of Israel, a vital 
     United States ally and longstanding friend, which is 
     confirmed by statements such as those made by Iranian leader 
     Ahmadinejad, Supreme Leader Khamene'i, and Expediency Council 
     leader Rafsanjani, demonstrating the threat of a nuclear-
     armed Iran: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring),  That Congress--
       (1) condemns, in the strongest terms, Iranian leader 
     Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's offensive remarks, contemptible 
     statements, and reprehensible policies aimed at the 
     destruction of the State of Israel;
       (2) calls on the United Nations Security Council to take up 
     charges against Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for 
     violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and 
     Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and Article 2, Section 4, 
     of the United Nations Charter;
       (3) further calls on the United Nations Security Council 
     and all Member States of the United Nations to consider 
     stronger measures to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear 
     weapons, which would be both a dangerous violation of the 
     Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a potential means to the 
     end of carrying out Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats against 
     Israel; and
       (4) reaffirms the unwavering strategic partnership and 
     close friendship between the United States and Israel and 
     reasserts the steadfast commitment of the United States to 
     defend the right of Israel to exist as a free and democratic 
     state.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Watson) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.


                             General Leave

  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution.
  Every Member of Congress is disturbed by the offensive comments that 
regularly emanate from the mouth of the Iranian President. His pledge 
to wipe Israel off the map and his denial of the Holocaust have shocked 
the civilized world.
  I am among those who feel it is no longer enough simply to shake our 
heads disapprovingly and go about our business. Context is everything.
  We are talking about a Jewish majority nation, Israel, whose very 
existence is threatened by another nation developing a nuclear bomb. 
Less than three-quarters of a century ago, Hitler and Nazi Germany 
wiped out more than a third of the world's Jewish population. We cannot 
stand by and watch if the Iranian President has similar designs.
  When Ahmadinejad says that Israel is a legitimate regime with no 
basis for its existence, our sense of justice tells us we cannot simply 
ignore it. When he describes Israel as ``a disgraceful blot [on] the 
face of the Islamic world'' and declares that ``anybody who recognizes 
Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,'' we can't, 
as people of conscience, dismiss these words as mere rhetoric.
  That is the premise of this resolution. This resolution urges us not 
to shrug, but to take action. It calls on the United Nations Security 
Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Article 2, 
section 4, of the United Nations Charter, which requires all member 
states of the United Nations to refrain in their international 
relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial 
integrity or political independence of any state. Even more poignantly, 
it calls for the Security Council to charge Ahmadinejad with violating 
the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide, which forbids direct and public incitement of genocide.
  I strongly endorse the premise of this resolution, that we should 
take seriously Ahmadinejad's venomous rhetoric and respond in a serious 
fashion that will demonstrate our fortitude in stopping him. With this 
measure, we also set an example by serving notice to other bigoted 
world leaders that we will not tolerate racism and thinly veiled 
threats.
  We should be more than happy to set aside any notion of prosecuting 
President Ahmadinejad under the Genocide Convention were the President 
to renounce his previous positions on the Holocaust and on Israel. In 
the absence of such apologies, however, the administration should 
initiate action that would result in the prosecution of President 
Ahmadinejad for crimes under the genocide convention and to do so 
without delay.
  I strongly support this resolution. I urge all my colleagues to do 
likewise to send a message to Iran.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 21, which 
denounces the Iranian regime, its belligerent rhetoric and behavior, 
and urges the international community to hold it accountable and 
prevent it from achieving its horrific goals.
  As the U.S. and our allies attempt to prevent the radical Islamic 
regime in Iran from developing nuclear capabilities, we should reflect 
on that regime's vision of the future. While most people desire to live 
in a world of freedom, of liberty, of prosperity and of peace, Iran's 
rulers actively seek a world of oppression, of destruction, of war, a 
world without Israel and without a United States of America.
  The Iranian leader Ahmadinejad frequently pushes for Israel's 
destruction, saying that this sovereign state should be wiped off the 
map, calling it a disgraceful blot on the face of the Islamic world, as 
Ambassador Watson pointed out, and proclaiming that anybody who 
recognized Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic Nation's fury.
  On June 3, Ahmadinejad stated, ``With God's help, the countdown 
button for the destruction of [Israel] has been pushed.'' When 
Ahmadinejad calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, let us be 
clear, he is calling for the genocide of Jews. That is why he has 
continued to cast doubt on the veracity of the Holocaust, calling it a 
``myth.''
  His despicable comments cheapen the suffering of millions of Jews, 
desecrate their memory and pave the way for another Holocaust to occur 
at the hands of Tehran. The Iranian leader does not threaten Jews and 
Israel, he explicitly threatens our very own existence.
  In October of 2005, he asked, ``Is it possible for us to witness a 
world without America and Zionism. . . . You had best know that this 
slogan and this goal are attainable, and, surely, can be achieved.''
  Mr. Speaker, his words and actions do not merely reflect his own 
views or those of a few powerless extremists. Iran's Supreme Leader, 
for example, said, ``This cancerous tumor of a state should be removed 
from the region.''
  Rafsanjani, the former Iranian leader who continues to hold 
significant influence, and who some mistakenly call a moderate, has 
threatened Israel with destruction by nuclear weapons, saying that the 
use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything, 
while it will merely harm the Islamic world.
  These are no idle threats, those are not just mere words and 
rhetoric. Iran continues to sponsor terrorist groups like Hamas and 
Hezbollah who have murdered scores of Israelis, they have murdered 
Americans as well, as well as Jews who live outside of Israel, and they 
have violated Israel's territory, and they continue to hold Israeli 
soldiers hostage.
  The existence of our Nation and Israel are not subject to compromise 
and the lives of Americans and Israelis are not negotiable.
  Indeed, in the wake of the Holocaust, the United Nations was founded 
to save

[[Page 16140]]

succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to protect the 
dignity and the worth of every person. The words and deeds of 
Ahmadinejad and his cohorts violate Article 2, section 4 of the U.N. 
Charter, which require all U.N. member states to ``refrain . . . from 
the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or 
political independence of any state.''
  Their implicit demands for the death of Jews violates the Genocide 
Convention, which states that those who commit or incite genocide shall 
be punished, whether they are rulers, government officials or private 
citizens.
  This resolution, offered by my friend and distinguished colleague, 
Mr. Rothman of New Jersey, and Mr. Kirk of Illinois, calls for the U.N. 
Security Council to charge Ahmadinejad with violating those binding 
documents and for the Council to consider stronger measures to prevent 
Iran from obtaining the nuclear weapons that it could use to threaten 
and to attack Israel and the world.
  Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to adopt this very serious 
resolution and reaffirm our resolve to end the Iranian threat.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have left?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California has 16 
minutes left. The gentlewoman from Florida has 15 minutes left.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the author of the 
concurrent resolution, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rothman).
  Mr. ROTHMAN. I thank the distinguished gentlelady from California, 
who was also a former Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia. 
Thank you for your leadership on this issue and on so many other 
issues.
  To my dear friend, the ranking member of the International Relations 
Committee, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), thank 
you for your strong support for this resolution and for countless other 
measures of importance to the world as well as to the United States of 
America.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 21, a 
resolution that I was proud to author, along with Congressman Mark Kirk 
from Illinois.
  Mr. Speaker, what do you do when you see injustice? What do you do 
when you see injustice? Well, as I told my children, you only have two 
choices when you see injustice. You do nothing, you walk away in the 
face of genocide, or someone else's torment or unjust, unfair 
treatment, do nothing, wear blinders like most of the world, or you do 
something, do something in the face of injustice.
  Here we have the President of a sovereign nation, a Member of the 
U.N., Ahmadinejad from Iran, who says that a fellow nation in the 
world, a member of the U.N., the state of Israel, should be wiped off 
the face of the Earth, the people killed. Not only is that a violation 
of the U.N. Charter, which, not surprisingly, says one cannot, as a 
member nation, advocate the death and destruction of another member 
nation, it also violates the Geneva Convention rules against incitement 
to genocide.
  Lest one think that Mr. Ahmadinejad, a twisted, backward, lunatic, be 
some nonthreatening individual crazy man who happens to talk about the 
death of millions of innocent people, this is the head of a nation, a 
sovereign nation with oil wealth and an army and with a stated goal of 
acquiring nuclear weapons to use to carry out his homicidal, genocidal, 
lunatic delusions of wiping out the State of Israel.
  So we must take his threats seriously. Just as so many say in the 
history of the 20th century as we review it, we should have taken 
Hitler's threats more seriously and not just disregarded him as some 
lunatic who couldn't do anything about his threats.
  So we have asked the United Nations, we are asking them through this 
resolution to enforce its own rules against the incitement of the 
destruction of a member nation of the U.N.
  What is happening at the U.N.? Today you have Indonesia, 
unbelievably, standing in the way of a simple resolution, simple 
statement of condemnation against Ahmadinejad's genocidal statement to 
destroy Israel.
  Why would Indonesia not support the rules of the United Nations? Why 
would not they not even stand silent, they are stopping the U.N. from 
announcing its resolution against Ahmadinejad's genocidal statements.
  Why would Indonesia do that? Whatever the reason, my friends, it's 
wrong.
  Unless Indonesia understands clearly that it will pay a price in 
world opinion and in economic matters and in political relations with 
the rest of the world, perhaps it won't move. But let Indonesia know 
that this United States House of Representatives, these Representatives 
of the 320 million American people, know what is wrong and what is 
right.

                              {time}  1615

  It is wrong to call for the death and destruction of a nation. It is 
wrong to call for the genocide of a people, and it is wrong for any 
other nation to stand in the way of justice, and we won't forget who 
helped us stop injustice and who prevented us from calling for the 
trial of Ahmadinejad before the international criminal court and 
sanctions upon Iran at the U.N.
  Why is it important for the United States House of Representatives to 
speak? Because we will not be silent in the face of this lunatic madman 
who threatens us and threatens our allies.
  By the way, if you read the history of the United States of America, 
we've been standing up for Israel since its founding. And in our 
founding, in the 1700s, if you read the history of all of our founders, 
they supported a Jewish homeland in Palestine. From the 1700s in 
America up until today, long before the Holocaust of the mid-20th 
century, back in the 1700s, Americans believed that the Jews should be 
returned to their homeland. And now this lunatic in Iran wants to wipe 
out this nation.
  And Israel is not just a sentimental favorite. Israel happens to be 
America's number one strategic military, economic ally in the entire 
Middle East. People say, well, you know Iraq, and we won't get into 
that debacle at the moment, what it's costing us in troops and our 
military, 150,000 troops. If the state of Israel did not exist with its 
powerful, pro-Western military, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, 
tolerating all peoples in the region, how many more troops would we 
have to have in the Middle East if Israel didn't exist? Another 
100,000, 200,000 Americans? We don't have to.
  Our ally, the state of Israel, is there for America, as it has been 
ever since its founding: military, intelligence, economic.
  So for so many reasons, legal, moral, military, national security for 
the United States, we cannot let this madman Ahmadinejad threaten 
America's greatest ally, the only Western democracy in the entire 
Middle East.
  I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I urge Indonesia 
to do what is right and join with us.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mr. Rothman for a very 
eloquent statement stating the purpose of this resolution.
  And with that, I'd like to yield such time as he may consume to the 
ranking member of our Middle East Subcommittee, Mr. Pence of Indiana.
  (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for 
yielding and for her extraordinary leadership on that area of the world 
about which I have some responsibilities as the ranking Republican on 
the Middle East Subcommittee.
  And like the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), I too wish 
to congratulate the principal author of H. Con. Res. 21. There is no 
greater or more eloquent advocate for that precious relationship 
between the free peoples of the United States of America and Israel 
than Congressman Steve Rothman of New Jersey. And I commend the 
gentleman for his leadership on this measure and would echo the 
gentlelady's remarks about the force and eloquence of his presentation. 
And I will not seek to emulate that today, nor compete with it.

[[Page 16141]]

  But I will take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to reflect on the importance 
of this resolution and the facts and the wisdom underpinning the need 
for Congress to be heard on the issue of calling on the United Nations 
Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with 
violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the 
Crime of Genocide and the U.N. charter because of his calls for the 
destruction of the state of Israel.
  The United Nations, in a very real sense, was formed when history 
failed. History and the international institutions on the planet failed 
to prevent barbaric action by fascist Nazi and Axis powers against the 
free world. And in every sense, genocide, the genocide that we saw 
perpetrated by the Germans against indigenous Jewish people and other 
ethnic populations, the genocide perpetrated by certain Japanese forces 
on mainland China, was part and parcel of the reason for the formation 
of the United Nations. And therefore the United Nations charter and the 
aforementioned Treaty on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide are all tied up one with another.
  And so for this Congress, as the legislature of that nation which 
sits on the Security Council, to call on the United Nations to live up 
to its historic commitment to prevent and confront genocide is, as we 
say in Indiana, not a stretch. This is at the very essence of what the 
United Nations was created to do, and the need for action by the United 
Nations Security Council when one considers the facts in this case 
truly speak for themselves. And let me lay those facts out.
  The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide, commonly known as the Genocide Convention, defines genocide 
as, among other things, ``the act of killing members of a national, 
ethnic, racial or religious group with the intent to destroy in whole 
or in part the targeted group.''
  Now, let's see if some of the statements by the leadership of the 
nation of Iran against the people of Israel qualify as calling upon the 
act of killing members of a national, ethnic, racial or religious group 
with the intent to destroy in whole or in part that group.
  Also, the Genocide Convention bans the conspiracy or incitement to 
commit genocide and states that violators shall be punished ``whether 
constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private 
individuals.''
  133 member states of the U.N. have ratified the Genocide Convention, 
including Iran.
  Article II, section 4 of the U.N. charter, also to which Iran has 
agreed, requires all member states of the United Nations ``to refrain 
in their international relations from the threat or use of force 
against the territorial integrity or political independence of any 
state.''
  Now, let's get to the facts because that's what the U.N. requires, 
that's what the treaty requires, that's what the Genocide Convention 
requires, that's what the U.N. charter requires.
  Well, let's start with October 26, 2005. Iranian leader Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be ``wiped off the map,'' and 
described Israel as a ``disgraceful blot on the face of the Islamic 
world,'' and declared that ``anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in 
the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.''
  12 December 2006, that same leader, Iranian leader Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad, addressed a Holocaust Denial Conference in Tehran and said 
that Israel would ``soon be wiped out.''
  15 December 2000, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamene'i stated that 
``Iran's stance has always been clear on this ugly phenomenon'' 
referring to Israel as the ugly phenomenon. He went on to say, ``We 
have repeatedly said that this cancerous tumor of a state should be 
removed from the region.''
  Iran, as we know, has aggressively pursued a clandestine effort to 
arm itself with nuclear weapons. Iran funds, trains and supports 
terrorist groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah, which have murdered 
Americans, Israelis and non-Israeli Jews, and seeks to destroy Israel.
  14 December 2001, the President of Iran's Expediency Council and 
former leader of Iran, Ali Rafsanjani, threatened Israel with nuclear 
destruction saying, and I quote, ``if one day the Islamic world is also 
equipped with weapons like those that Israel now possesses, then the 
imperialist strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even 
one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything, while it will 
merely harm the Islamic world.''
  Men and women, these are comments made by the leaders of a sovereign 
nation that is in a headlong pursuit to obtain nuclear weapons, and 
has, by international consensus, already obtained missile technology 
that could deliver such weapons within the theater of the Middle East.
  History teaches no truth more clearly than this: nations should take 
tyrants at their word. For the United States of America to fail to call 
on the institution of the United Nations to take the tyrants in Iran at 
their word would be a grievous historical error and one for which 
future generations of Americans like those injured soldiers that I 
toured through the Capitol earlier this afternoon will likely have to 
pay.
  This resolution, authored by Mr. Rothman from New Jersey and Mr. Kirk 
from Illinois, strongly condemns Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 
offensive remarks, contemptible statements, and reprehensible policies 
directed at the destruction of Israel; calls on the United Nation's 
Security Council to take up charges against Ahmadinejad for violating 
the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide and article II, section 4 of the United Nations charter.
  It also calls on the Security Council and all member states of the 
United Nations to consider stronger measures to prevent Iran from 
obtaining nuclear weapons, which would both be in violation of nuclear 
non-proliferation treaties and give them the potential to eliminate 
Israel.
  And it reaffirms, of course, the unwavering strategic partnership and 
close friendship between the United States and Israel, and reasserts 
the steadfast commitment of the United States to defend the right of 
Israel to exist as a free and democratic and Jewish state.
  The time for this resolution has come. I commend the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Rothman) for his bold leadership, and I pledge my 
strong support and urge all of my colleagues to make this strong and 
deafening statement that this Congress and this Nation will take 
tyrants at their word, and we will call on the United Nations today to 
live up to their charter.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield the balance of 
our time to Ambassador Watson. And I thank Mr. Pence for his eloquent 
statement.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I will yield then the rest of my time to the 
gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Dennis Kucinich.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlelady from 
California (Ms. Watson) and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
  And I want to begin by stating that the sponsor of this resolution, 
Mr. Rothman, is a person of great heart and compassion, someone who I 
admire and am proud to serve with in this Congress. His dedication to 
peace and to justice is something that is admirable. I share his 
dedication to the survival and the security of the State of Israel.
  At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask unanimous consent to 
include a New York Times translation of the text of President 
Ahmadinejad's speech, a translation by the Middle East Media Research 
Institute of his speech, articles relating to an analysis of the 
speech, and the words that were used by Virginia Tilley of 
Johannesburg, South Africa and by Erash Narsi written on the 18th of 
January 2007.

                              {time}  1630

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would

[[Page 16142]]

inquire, is the gentleman inserting into the Congressional Record a 
speech by Ahmadinejad?
  Mr. KUCINICH. If the gentlewoman will yield, as part of this debate, 
that is correct.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I was just asking if you are putting in the 
Congressional Record a speech by Ahmadinejad.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Yes. The text from the New York Times, a translation.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is calling 
Ahmadinejad's comments akin to genocide, calling for the destruction of 
the State of Israel, and calling for the wiping out of millions of 
people because they are Jews. And I object to having this person's 
words be placed in the Congressional Record, the record of the United 
States of America, of the people's House, and I object.
  With all due respect to the gentleman, he may object to the 
resolution and speak against it, but I object to having Ahmadinejad's 
speech being inserted into the Record at the same time that the 
gentleman is speaking against this resolution.
  So I do object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this insertion, which is 
from the New York Times, printed in a newspaper of general circulation, 
is to be able to clarify that the quotes that are cited in the 
resolution are either mistranslated or out of context, and I think that 
should be something that would be of interest.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would further yield, 
I understand if that is what you would like to use to make the 
connection.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, this is not my 
translation. This is a translation from the New York Times Tehran 
Bureau of this speech, and that is what I wanted to submit in the 
Record, because this debate, even if unintentional, could be used as 
still another cause for a U.S. attack on Iran, and because the 
International Atomic Energy Agency has not established that Iran is 
developing nuclear weapons and because we went to war against Iraq on 
the basis of misinformation, disinformation, and because I stand for 
peaceful resolution of all international disputes in the Middle East, 
in the region, and because I do share the concern that Israel would be 
in peril, which is why I did the research. I did the research. That is 
the basis of my wanting to submit a translation.
  Now, there is an old saying ``much is lost in translation,'' and if 
there is so much riding on this resolution, it would appear to me that 
the prudent approach to take would be to read a translation from Farsi 
to English. And I have two such translations to offer this Congress if 
anyone is interested.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KUCINICH. Of course, I will yield to my friend from New Jersey.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. My friend, you referred to a translation of a speech. 
The offenses of Ahmadinejad are many. And three separate remarks on 
three separate occasions calling for the destruction of the state of 
Israel, does the gentleman have translations of each of those three 
separate remarks calling for the genocidal destruction of the state of 
Israel?
  Mr. KUCINICH. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I have pretty thorough 
translations that I would like to proceed to speak to.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Do you have them, of all three?
  Mr. KUCINICH. I am going to proceed specifically with the comments, 
if I may. Everything that I have relates to this resolution, my good 
friend. And I am going to proceed now, and then I will yield again, 
certainly. I just want to make sure we can continue this.
  I want to proceed with quotes from this resolution. I am just going 
to stay very closely to this resolution because this is what we are 
debating, a resolution before the House that calls on the Security 
Council to charge Iranian President Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 
and the United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction 
of the State of Israel, something that I obviously would find abhorrent 
and repugnant if he said that. And I started to do research on this, 
and I am just calling it to your attention.
  With respect to the quote that he said that Israel should be wiped 
off the map, that is what the quote was, I have seen, from translations 
in the New York Times and the Middle East Research Institute that this 
speech that Ahmadinejad gave on October 26, 2005, does not call for 
Israel to be wiped off the map.
  Now, H. Con. Res. 21 states that he has called for Israel to be wiped 
off the map. But according to the Middle East Research Institute, it is 
more correctly translated as ``eliminated from the pages of history.'' 
And when taken in full context, here is what the quote says: ``This 
regime that is occupying Qods,'' or Jerusalem, ``must be eliminated 
from the pages of history.'' He is talking about the regime.
  Now, H. Con. Resolution 21 accuses President Ahmadinejad of saying 
that Israel, and these are awful quotes if he said it, it is horrible, 
that Israel is a ``disgraceful blot on the face of the Islamic world.'' 
However, the New York Times translates this section of the speech as 
saying, ``Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in 
his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the 
new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the 
Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the 
Islamic world.''
  Now, I object to anyone's putting the word ``disgraceful'' in 
connection with Israel. However, he did not say, he wasn't talking 
about the people of Israel, the nation, he was talking about the 
regime.
  Here again is the quote that is included in this resolution: 
``Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic 
nation's fury.''
  Look, I recognize Israel and I am not interested in that kind of 
condemnation. But H. Con. Res. 21 accuses President Ahmadinejad of 
declaring that anybody who recognized Israel will burn in the fire of 
the Islamic nations' fury. However, in two separate translations, it is 
clear that Ahmadinejad is referring to the Israeli regime.
  The New York Times translation: ``Anyone who recognizes this regime 
because of the pressure of the world oppressor, or because of naivete 
or selfishness, will be eternally disgraced and will burn in the fury 
of the Islamic nations.''
  The Middle East Media Research Institute translation reads: If 
someone is under the pressure of hegemonic power,'' the West, ``and 
understands that something is wrong, or he is naive, or he is an 
egotist and his hedonism leads him to recognize the Zionist regime, he 
should know that he will burn in the fire of Islamic Ummah,'' nation . 
. .
  So what he is calling for is regime change, according to these 
translations. According to these translations, he is calling for regime 
change. He is not calling for the destruction of Israel. Now, I am just 
going on the basis of a New York Times translation.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KUCINICH. I will yield to my friend.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman aware that it is standard 
usage in the Government of Iran and in many of the Arab regimes that 
since they will not say the word ``Israel,'' they refer to Israel as 
the Zionist entity or the Zionist regime so that when they say the 
``Zionist regime,'' they are not necessarily calling for regime change? 
When they say the ``Zionist regime'' or the ``Zionist entity'' must be 
abolished, they are usually referring to the country of Israel?
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, to respond to my friend, if that is what 
he meant, then we have cause for great concern. However, in one of the 
articles I wanted to submit so that Congress could see it, it says, and 
I quote, ``What did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words 
in Farsi,'' and then they give the quote, ``that passage

[[Page 16143]]

will mean nothing to most people but one word might ring a bell: 
`regime.' It is the word `regime' pronounced just like the English word 
with an extra 
e-h sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country 
or Israel the land mass but the Israeli regime. That is a vastly 
significant distinction as one cannot wipe a regime off the map.''
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KUCINICH. I would be glad to have my friend respond and also for 
Mr. Rothman to respond.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I will respond again. It proves nothing 
because the fact is that if you are just looking at etymology, it may 
make sense. But if you look at usage in the Middle East, the Arab and 
Iranian people who wish the State of Israel eliminated have, since 1947 
or 1948, referred to Israel either as the ``Zionist regime'' or the 
``Zionist entity.'' And you can look back at the rhetoric of 1967 when 
they lined up the troops and they said all the Jews will be killed. 
They talked about the Zionist regime or the Zionist entity being 
eliminated. They weren't talking about regime change; they were talking 
about genocide.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KUCINICH. Yes.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. First of all, a lot of these statements occurred in the 
capital of Iran during the World Without Zionism Conference. Zionism is 
a historic movement of returning the Jews to their Biblical homeland 
where they were expelled for thousands of years. So when they have a 
conference for a world without Zionism and in that conference say that 
the Zionist regime will be wiped off the map, one could reasonably 
understand that there would be no more Zionism, no Jewish state, 
because that is what Zionism is, no Jewish state in the Middle East. By 
the way, the Middle East, which is a sea of Islamic regimes. A sea of 
Islamic regimes. Israel's offense is having the nerve to exist as a 
non-Islamic regime.
  But I ask the gentleman for translations of the other matters that 
came before the U.N. Namely, on December 12 of 2006, during a 
conference in Iran denying the Holocaust, Ahmadinejad said Israel would 
soon be wiped out. Not the Labor Government of Israel or the Likud 
Government of Israel, but Israel would be wiped out. And then again 
just a few weeks ago on Sunday, June 2, Ahmadinejad said the world 
would soon see the destruction of Israel. And I say to my friend from 
Ohio, I know you have the best intentions.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Ohio has 
expired.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 
3 minutes to be divided equally between Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. Rothman 
and myself, and I would yield to Mr. Rothman, then Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, 
then I will close.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  Hearing none, we will have 3 additional minutes of debate, divided 
equally between the gentleman from Ohio and the gentlewoman from 
Florida.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for asking for 
this time.
  I want to be clear about my objection of putting Ahmadinejad's 
statements in the Record. Mr. Kucinich has an opportunity, as a Member 
of this House, to clear up the record, as he has pointed out in his 
statements, and put in those remarks on his own. I would hate to have 
Ahmadinejad's statements be included as a part of the record in this 
part of the debate where we are saying that he is a despot. He is a 
person who denies the Holocaust existence, who has called for Israel's 
destruction, and to be mincing about with words and translations, I 
know the gentleman from Ohio's motives are clear. He is not saying that 
he is calling for Israel's destruction, but I think that any 
interpretation of Ahmadinejad's words and deeds would clearly say that 
that is Ahmadinejad's motives.

                              {time}  1645

  So I would not like his statements to be made a part of the record in 
this part of the discussion, but he, as a Member of Congress, is free 
to clear the record, as he points out, and put Ahmadinejad's words on 
his own time in the Congressional Record.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I would be glad to yield my remaining time to 
Mr. Rothman.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from Florida has 
previously expired.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. I thank the Speaker, the gentlelady from Florida, and 
the gentleman from Ohio.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will suspend.
  The gentleman from Ohio actually has the time.
  Mr. KUCINICH. What I had said in my unanimous consent was Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen and Mr. Rothman, then I was going to be last. That was the UC.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair interpreted the gentleman's 
request such that he would have 1\1/2\ minutes and the gentlewoman from 
Florida would have 1\1/2\ minutes. That is the order of the House.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Then I yield 30 seconds to my friend from New Jersey 
(Mr. Rothman).
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is afraid that because at an 
anti-Zionism ``World without Zionism'' conference, Ahmadinejad said, 
``Wipe Israel off the map.'' We are quibbling over whether he said on 
another occasion, wipe the Israel regime, Zionist regime off the map 
and on a third occasion said, the world would soon see the destruction 
of Israel. The gentleman thinks there is ambiguity there.
  This is a regime in Iran sending troops and equipment, killing our 
soldiers in Iraq, building nuclear weapons, threatening to kill our 
number one ally, the State of Israel, and he doesn't want the U.N. to 
look into it to condemn them? I think the gentleman is wrong.
  Mr. KUCINICH. If, in fact, that's what he said, then of course the 
U.N. should look into it. But I think we should look into whether or 
not he said that. And again, I offered to submit, but was denied a 
unanimous consent, the text of his speech, and a translation by Nazila 
Fathi in the New York Times Tehran Bureau of the speech. This is from 
the New York Times. And they certainly have never been accused of any 
kind of propaganda against Israel.
  So I would say that it is important for us to look at this. And I 
don't think it is an unreasonable request that we should look at 
exactly what this person said so we will know what the appropriate 
course of action is to take.
  I stand for peace. I stood before this Congress and challenged the 
war against Iraq when very few people were willing to do that because I 
questioned whether or not Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction. I 
am questioning whether or not this person is trying to destroy Israel. 
If he is, then I certainly support my friend's concerns.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am a proud cosponsor of to 
day's resolution which calls for the United Nations to take action to 
uphold one of its most important conventions--the Convention of 
Genocide. With the violence of the Holocaust just a few years behind 
them, the members of the United Nations in 1948 established a 
convention to prevent such atrocities from ever happening again.
  There is much talk at the U.N. about preventing war and genocide but 
unfortunately there is little action. The Iranian President has called 
for a U.N. member nation to be ``wiped off the map.'' Do we have any 
doubt that the U.N. would sanction the Israeli Prime Minister if the 
positions were reversed?
  The Iranian president and the Ayatollahs' supreme wish is the 
destruction of Israel and all her people. They have not tried to mask 
this goal--they doubt the holocaust of the past and make plans for a 
holocaust of the future.
  Ahmadinejad has even gone as far as speculating that the collateral 
damage of attacking Israel with nuclear weapons would be worth the cost 
to the Muslim world. For a regime that is developing nuclear 
capabilities, these are truly dangerous words. In the 1930s fascist 
dictators made bold claims of impending violence and we ignored them to 
our own peril.
  The world should not ignore these words of aggression. Today, we call 
on U.N. member

[[Page 16144]]

nations to call out Ahmadinejad, to condemn these statements, and to 
work together to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
  Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 21, 
a resolution calling on the United Nations Security Council to charge 
Iranian President e.g. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 
and the United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction 
of the State of Israel.
  The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide defines genocide as, among other things, the act of killing 
members of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group with the 
intent to destroy the targeted group.
  Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly made 
inflammatory and hateful comments regarding Israel, including direct 
statements calling for the destruction of Israel, an act of genocide. 
In 2005, he called for Israel to be `wiped off the map' and led a group 
of students in chants of `death to Israel'. Furthermore, the Iranian 
president has questioned the history of the Holocaust, an insult to the 
millions of men and women who perished as a result of that genocide.
  These comments are not only hateful and unacceptable, but his 
comments threaten the security of Israel. As Iran funds, trains, and 
openly supports terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and 
Islamic Jihad, that are determined to destroy Israel, Ahmadinejad's 
words raise concern on Iran's intentions. We must send a clear message 
to Iran and its President: we condemn your dangerous and reckless 
remarks.
  As a member of the United Nations, the President of Iran's comments 
violate U.N. rules and must be dealt with decisively by the United 
Nations leadership and all those in the Security Council.
  I want to thank the gentleman from New York, Mr. Rothman, for his 
hard work on this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this resolution to call on the United Nations Security 
Council to hold Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accountable for 
his intolerable words that call for the destruction of the State of 
Israel.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I voted ``present'' on H. Con. Res. 21 
because I believe it dilutes the definition of genocide and would 
ratchet up tensions with Iran without any likelihood of actually doing 
anything about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's dangerous anti-Semitism and Iran's 
ability to inflict harm on Israel. Instead, we need a new framework for 
relations with Iran that advances our interests and values through 
engagement and support for the Iranian people. At a time when we 
haven't dealt meaningfully with the serious and ongoing genocide in 
Darfur, I am not convinced it advances our long-term interest in 
strengthening the international legal regime against mass killing by 
defining another Muslim leader's call for Israel's destruction as 
genocide.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this 
resolution. This resolution is an exercise in propaganda that serves 
one purpose: to move us closer to initiating a war against Iran. Citing 
various controversial statements by Iranian President Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad, this legislation demands that the United Nations Security 
Council charge Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the 
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
  Having already initiated a disastrous war against Iraq citing U.N. 
resolutions as justification, this resolution is like deja-vu. Have we 
forgotten 2003 already? Do we really want to go to war again for U.N. 
resolutions? That is where this resolution, and the many others we have 
passed over the last several years on Iran, is leading us. I hope my 
colleagues understand that a vote for this bill is a vote to move us 
closer to war with Iran.
  Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people 
off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do 
condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-
emptive nuclear strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the 
same kind of condemnation? Does anyone believe that dropping nuclear 
weapons on Iran will not wipe a people off the map? When it is said 
that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are 
those who say it not also threatening genocide? And we wonder why the 
rest of the world accuses us of behaving hypocritically, of telling the 
rest of the world ``do as we say, not as we do.''
  I strongly urge my colleagues to consider a different approach to 
Iran, and to foreign policy in general. GEN William Odom, President 
Reagan's director of the National Security Agency, outlined a much more 
sensible approach in a recent article titled ``Exit From Iraq Should Be 
Through Iran.'' General Odom wrote: ``Increasingly bogged down in the 
sands of Iraq, the US thrashes about looking for an honorable exit. 
Restoring cooperation between Washington and Tehran is the single most 
important step that could be taken to rescue the U.S. from its 
predicament in Iraq.'' General Odom makes good sense. We need to engage 
the rest of the world, including Iran and Syria, through diplomacy, 
trade, and travel rather than pass threatening legislation like this 
that paves the way to war. We have seen the limitations of force as a 
tool of U.S. foreign policy. It is time to try a more traditional and 
conservative approach. I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) that the House suspend the 
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 21, as 
amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. 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 question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________