[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. ____________________