[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19571-19572]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             FIGHTING ISIS

  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, Americans are understandably frightened by 
the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino. As we mourn the loss 
of the victims, our hearts go out to their friends and families.
  We were shocked 14 years ago, on September 11, when foreign 
terrorists struck our homeland. For the first time, two big oceans did 
not protect us from foreign terrorists. Now we know we have to be 
prepared to meet the threat not only abroad but here at home.
  First, that means we have to see the threat clearly. It doesn't just 
come from shadowy foreign terrorist groups such as ISIS or Al Qaeda; 
now we see that it comes from a lone wolf or wolves, individuals who 
get radicalized. We saw that in the case at Fort Hood. We have seen it 
in other cases. We saw it in the case that was averted in Times Square, 
from someone who had come all the way across the country. They are 
extremely hard to detect.
  Of course, ISIS uses the Internet to spread its propaganda, its 
influence, and to try to inspire disaffected young people with its 
propaganda far beyond where ISIS is located over in the Middle East. 
That means we have to use all the tools at our disposal to collect 
actionable intelligence, harden our defenses, counter radicalization, 
counter propaganda, and stiffen our resolve.
  We ought to ensure that terrorists can't exploit the Visa Waiver 
Program. There are 38 countries with which we share this visa waiver. 
We ought to ensure that our law enforcement and intelligence agencies 
have the access they need to the terrorists' electronic communications 
to disrupt the attacks--that is a big order--all the while protecting 
Americans' privacy and constitutional rights.
  That is why this Senator thinks it was a mistake to change the 
previous law, as we did earlier this year, which allowed telecom 
business bulk records to be readily accessed to trace terrorist 
communications. We have done this. We do not have the ready access of 
those bulk business records. Again, I remind our listeners we are not 
talking about the contents of communications--telephone calls or 
content of the Internet messages. We are talking about the bulk records 
which are business records that such and such a number or such and such 
an IP address on such and such a date transmitted a message to another 
number or another IP address.
  In the past, through a court order, those bulk records were held by 
the NSA, granting ready access so that if we were trying to stop a 
terrorist by getting intel ahead of time, we could go back and see 
where those communications were and with whom and how many hops it had 
gone in order to try to break up the terrorist activity. The problem 
with the lone wolf is that if they are disguising their operations, 
they are not communicating with anybody. That is why it makes it so 
much more difficult to intercept the lone wolf who has been inspired by 
ISIS.
  Recently we saw that ISIS has claimed the responsibility for the 
bombing of a Russian airliner over Egypt, and it reminds us that our 
planes and airports remain a target for terror attacks. That is why I 
am introducing, and will explain tomorrow, legislation to tighten 
internal security at airports across the country. We had some good 
examples of that a year ago in Atlanta. Unbelievably, for several 
months, guns were brought into the Atlanta airport by airport workers, 
were transferred to a passenger who had already gone through TSA 
security, and they were actually transported over a number of months 
from Atlanta to New York. It is the lack of security on the perimeter 
of allowing workers into the airport proper that needs to be tightened 
up at all of our 300 airports. Two have already done that over the last 
several years, and I am very proud of the Miami airport and the Orlando 
airport that they have done it and done it very successfully.
  Because ISIS exploits war in Syria and the instability and sectarian 
conflict in Iraq, meeting the terrorist threat means the use of 
military force as well. With the help of our coalition partners, as we 
speak, our forces are striking ISIS from the air and training local 
forces to fight ISIS on the ground. We are intensifying airstrikes 
against ISIS leadership, against heavy weapons, against oil tankers and 
oil wells, and have recently deployed U.S. Special Operations forces to 
help local forces build the necessary battlefield momentum to take back 
territory.
  Special Operations forces will be central to the fight in order to 
avoid the large-scale deployment of U.S. ground forces. These forces 
are trained to conduct surgical strikes against terrorist leaders. 
There are press reports that GEN Joseph Votel, the current commander of 
the U.S. Special Operations Command, in the next year will become the 
next commander of Central Command, responsible for operations against 
ISIS. He already works side by side with General Austin--the commander 
of U.S. Central Command in Tampa at MacDill Air Force Base--and he will 
bring tremendous experience to the job.
  The Congress is not doing our job. We should authorize the use of 
military force. It is our responsibility. I believe the President has 
the responsibility to fight ISIS in Iraq or Syria or wherever, but the 
unity of the Congress backing the President in law is constitutionally 
required. We ought to debate these proposals and vote. The 
authorization would show the world that the United States is united in 
defeating ISIS.
  The military fight is one piece of a broader effort to destroy ISIS 
and bring about a political transition in Syria to a government where 
finally Bashar al-Assad will have finally left. That is critical to 
ending the war, ending the resulting humanitarian crisis, and stemming 
the flow of the refugees. Our efforts will take time and commitment, 
but they are clearly necessary to protect our national security.
  This is going to be a long, hard war. We can't do it overnight. There 
has been success in the war effort. We brought together 65 nations. 
Twelve thousand terrorist fighters have been killed. We have shrunk the 
territory ISIS occupies and has sanctuary.
  I want to show the Senate this map. It has been shown before. It is 
not classified. All the area in green is what ISIS used to occupy, 
along with the area in orange--there along the Euphrates River. All of 
that area in green ISIS occupied but no longer does because of the 
coalition efforts. There has been success. Someone needs to talk about 
that success. Going forward, we are going to have to use more Special 
Operations troops. We are going to have to insist on our Arab neighbors 
picking up the fight and doing the

[[Page 19572]]

fighting on the ground, and we do not need to make the mistake of tens 
of thousands of Americans on the ground because that plays right into 
ISIS's hands because it looks like--and ISIS would portray it as--it is 
the United States versus Muslims.
  We should treat Muslims with respect here at home in America; treat 
them with the respect they deserve. Don't overreact. Otherwise that 
plays to ISIS's advantage of the image of Americans; in other words, it 
is us versus them. We are accelerating the fight. We have more and more 
intense coalition partners. We have extensive intel sharing. We have an 
outreach to Muslims about the truth of ISIS, and we insist our partners 
share their intel with us. That includes the visa waiver of those 38 
nations.
  Fear at this time--like San Bernardino--is a natural response. It 
happens at times such as this, but we cannot let fear get the best of 
us. We must overcome the fear and not let it compromise who we are as 
Americans by overreacting. We need to nail down a truth that our 
government has no greater obligation than to keep us safe.
  I want to share with the Senate, where is the unity that we used to 
have? I know it is not in vogue to say ``the good old days,'' but I can 
tell you that when this Senator was a young Congressman and when it 
came to national security, partisanship stopped at the water's edge. 
Isn't it time to unify? Isn't it the time to disagree without being 
disagreeable? Isn't it time to think of ourselves as Americans instead 
of partisans? Isn't it time to remember that Latin phrase that is up 
there above the President's desk, ``e pluribus unum''--out of many, 
one. It is time to come together. God bless America.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Ernst). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask to be recognized in morning 
business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.

                          ____________________