Dennis Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let us suppose for a moment that these funds that were we are appropriating tonight are only for Afghanistan, that the half a billion dollars listed in this report for combat air patrols would in fact be used in Afghanistan. I would like to call to the attention of this House recent news accounts that indicate that hundreds and hundreds of innocent civilians of Afghanistan have been killed accidentally in bombings by U.S. warplanes. I say that in an appeal to the administration to stop the bombing, because we have no quarrel with the Afghan people. The Taliban are overthrown, al Qaeda has fled, bin Laden has vanished, and yet, with this document, we see that the bombs will continue to drop indiscriminately. Is there any American who has not been shaken at the mere thought of the horrors of U.S. warplanes bombing a wedding celebration in the village of Bal Khel killing dozens of innocent civilians? Whatever moral authority our Nation had at the beginning of the conflict is being lost in such bombings. These types of acts do not represent America. Democracy does not wed terror. These acts must not be cloaked in the irresponsible and inhuman euphemism of collateral damage. I appeal to the administration to stop the bombing, let an international police force continue in Afghanistan, and let the humble people of Afghanistan be spared the friendly fire from the skies. Enough of bombing the villages to save the villages. Stop the bombing, I appeal to the administration. Mr. Speaker, I took this floor this evening so that questions which need to be asked in this House are in fact asked at a time when an administration is widely publicized to be preparing for a preemptive strike in Iraq. The administration sought and received an amount of money that is a virtual blank check to spend $10 billion any way they see fit. Now, this idea, of course, has met resistance from members of the committee, and I will acknowledge that, ever since it was proposed. Legislators have said that they did not want to give the administration a blank check. But everyone who has looked at this knows that the administration request has been vague and, yet, with the breakdown that we have here, money for combat air patrols, money for chemical and biological defense, money for the conversion of Tomahawk missiles, in truth, this does not sound much like Afghanistan; it begins to sound like Iraq. When we take that in the context of the New York Times' discovery of the Pentagon preliminary planning document which talks about a large- scale invasion, my concern, Mr. Speaker, is that notwithstanding the fine work of the men and women of our committee, that it is quite possible this administration will go in that direction. Indeed, the gentleman from New Jersey identified three specific areas where a President could proceed, and his comments were, frankly, quite in line with the assessments of other Members of Congress, not precluding the possibility of the use of these funds for something other than Afghanistan, notwithstanding the fine work of our committee. I think it is noteworthy, at a time when an administration is essentially abandoning multilateralists and articulating a first-strike approach in Afghanistan, I think it is noteworthy that this Congress has yet to have the kind of full debate that Members of both Houses of Congress are beginning to call for. I think it is important that when we see this cavalcade of headlines talking about massive invasions, a quarter of a million troops, policies of hitting first, anticipating that Iraq would target our troops; well, if there is an anticipation of that, then we are talking about an invasion and, above all that, doing this before the November elections. In previous legislation tonight, this House took action on a conference report on Defense and Homeland Security Supplemental Appropriations in providing an additional $14.5 billion in funding related to the U.S. military. Now, I think that the people of this country have a right to know if the administration is, in fact, planning to go into Iraq, and this Congress has a right to know and a right to participate fully in a full-fledged debate. As a matter of fact, even though myself and our esteemed ranking member may have a difference of opinion on that, whether or not we should do it, I think we agree that certainly Congress has a role. Essentially, I would say to the chairman that is what I am here to affirm, that Congress does have a role to play. Of course, I am opposed to any such invasion for reasons I do not need to get into right now. But even more important is that this Congress affirms its position with respect to its power to send men and women from our country into combat against Iraq or any other country. So I want to thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member for their diligence on this bill, but I also want to express my reservations, serious reservations about the symmetry between the contents of this bill and the planning document which The New York Times covered in full detail. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. And which one is that?

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, news accounts indicate that hundreds upon hundreds of innocent Afghans have been killed by mistakes by U.S. war planes. Stop the bombing. We have no quarrel with the Afghan people. The Taliban are overthrown. Al Qaeda has fled. bin Laden has vanished, and yet the bombs still drop indiscriminately. Is there any American who has not been shaken at the mere thought of the horror of U.S. war planes bombing a wedding celebration in the village of Kakrak killing dozens of civilians? Whatever moral authority our Nation has had at the beginning of the conflict is rapidly being lost. This act does not represent America. Democracy does not wed terror. This act must not be cloaked in the irresponsible and inhuman euphemism of ``collateral damage.'' Stop the bombing. Let an international police force continue in Afghanistan. Let the humble people of Afghanistan be spared friendly fire issued from the skies. Enough of the bombing of villages to save the villages. Stop the bombing.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise to enter into a colloquy with the chairman. I would like to bring to the chairman's attention the Cameron elm, the one we walk by every day on the way to vote. It is one of the oldest and most historic trees on the Capitol grounds and was named after Senator Simon Cameron, a Republican from Pennsylvania, who saved it from being cut down in the 1870s for a walkway. This is a strong and vibrant tree that has overcome many obstacles and can clearly thrive for many more years. I want to make sure that proper attention is given to the Cameron elm to prevent treatable health problems from turning more severe. I would like to work with the chairman to ensure that the health of the Cameron elm is monitored and maintained.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the chairman.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, it is worth considering the headlines regarding Iraq in the last week. From United Press International: ``U.S. Plans Massive Invasion of Iraq.'' From Associated Press: ``U.S. Says Iraq Would Target Troops.'' From United Press: ``According to officials who spoke to UPI, three dates are being discussed as possible times to launch the attack. The first would be before the November elections.'' And from Associated Press: ``U.S. worries Iraq's chemical, biological weapons would target invading American troops in Israel.'' There has been discussion of a quarter of a million of our men and women being sent to Iraq. The discussion is in the media, it is not on the floor of this House. The New York Times editorial says as follows: ``Congressional leaders, including top Democrats, have rushed to voice approval for the popular notion of getting rid of Mr. Hussein. They have not, however, lived up to their responsibility for demanding a full public disclosure about how to pursue this attractive goal with maximum chances of success and minimum risk to American forces' interest and alliances. Discussion of these issues is possible without giving away legitimate military secrets.'' War with Iraq, if it comes, is still many months away. What is urgently needed now is informed and serious debate, and attention to article I, section 8 of the Constitution, which requires Congress has a role.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to share a 4th of July speech given by Robert Blomquist, Mayor of Olmsted Falls. Mayor Blomquist eloquently spoke of the values and principles on which our country was founded that we must remember and cherish on Independence Day. Welcome to the City of Olmsted Falls 4th of July festivities. Five weeks ago we gathered here to honor and remember the members of our countries' armed forces whom paid with their lives for the ideas behind the event and document that we celebrate today, the anniversary of the signing, and adoption, by the continental congress, or the declaration of independence. Today is just not about the birth of a nation. Today is a day in which we pay respect and tribute to the men that pulled together in one document, the most comprehensive and complete ordered thoughts about the nature of man, the nature of government, and how human beings can exist to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The careful thinking that is the fabric of our great nation. A statement of how we can be free as individuals, but still coexist in a structured and orderly society. When I think about the history of our country, I am so grateful that I am a citizen of the United States, that my children and I are the beneficiaries of the ideals of the best human nature. Think with me for a moment. This land is the product of a unique confluence of the evolution of technology, economics, politics, and the nature of man. In the 17th century it became technically and economically possible for European powers to claim and settle lands beyond their boundaries. Politically Spain, France and Great Britain competed to exploit their claims in the new world and expand their influence. The original 13 colonies were settled between 1607 and 1732, by Great Britain. It took 125 years and began 170 years before the birth of our nation. People first came as agents of the king to exploit the natural resources, and later came to escape the king and a situation where men were not recognized as being created equal, but where it was believed that men were given rights by station of birth. At the time this land was being settled. The ideas of what is the true natural state of man. What is freedom and liberty? What is the role of government? What are the divine rights of the king as a sovereign? Should a king truly govern without the consent of his subject people? These ideas were being explored by such philosophers as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau. At the time the colonies were flourishing. These ideas flourished with the American colonies. They took root and grew in the minds of both the intellectual and the layman as natural state of the human desire to be free and independent itself. We know that this led to the events of our American Revolution. As we openly rebelled against an unjust king we still tried to organize ourselves and our government to better reflect mans desires. The declaration of independence when you read it was nothing more than an indictment and redress of grievances in the literal sense. It was an announcement to the world of the reasoning behind the rebellion. When Congress adopted the declaration of July 4, 1776, England virtually ignored it. It received a 6 line mention in the London Morning Post, just below a theater notice. But on these shores it galvanized a people, to expend treasure and lives to fight for the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that we still enjoy today. The Declaration of Independence was the product of the best thinking on social and political philosophy of the time. It became the blueprint of our constitution. And continues to this day to inspire men to pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. In the year that has just passed, between today, and last year's celebration we again find it necessary to defend the foundation of our freedoms enjoyed as Americans. At the time Jefferson wrote it and 56 men signed it and were declared treasonous, and sentenced to death, no one knew what would happen as a result of the Declaration of Independence. We have the advantage of 226 years of history to evaluate and appreciate this event. Shortly before his death in 1826, Thomas Jefferson also had the advantage of the passage of time to reflect. The following is a passage of a letter written by Jefferson, as he had to decline an invitation to Washington City to celebrate Independence Day because of ill health. Expressing his regrets that he could not join with the small group of worthy gentlemen who created and signed the declaration, he said, ``I should have indeed delighted to gather with an exchanged congratulations with those who joined with us to have elected to not submit to the sword, and to enjoyed with our fellow citizens after a half century of prosperity to continue of the choice we made. To assume the blessings of self government that restores the right of the exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. All eyes are open to the rights of man. For ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights and our devotion to them.''

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the right to object. Mr. Chairman, if I can have an inquiry of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman and certainly would yield to his higher wisdom.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for his work on this, and I am supporting his amendment.

Mr. KUCINICH. If we were to adopt the gentleman's amendment, how would this effect a beneficial purpose for the American taxpayers?

Mr. KUCINICH. So basically we have a system here where they are testing technology, but they are not accepting the results?

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. KUCINICH. Reclaiming my time, where they have had success, they have been given advance information. Now in a real life scenario are they likely to have advance information on trajectory and speed and launch time? Is that likely?

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let us just go over this now. My colleague is saying that in these tests they are giving advance information, this missile coming in, they have advance information on what the trajectory is going to be and what the speed is going to be and what time it is going to be launched and where it is going to be launched from and what the countermeasures might be; and even though they have advance information, they still cannot make this work?

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, so from my colleague's recitation here, what my colleague is saying basically and what has been testified to is that the tests have been basically tricked up to make it appear that this system works?

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, so they had earlier tests when even when they put a sign on it that said hit me, they were still unsuccessful?

Mr. KUCINICH. Have they had tests where they had a beacon on it and they failed that test?

Mr. KUCINICH. So there is an incoming missile for this test that has a beacon on it?

Mr. KUCINICH. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate what the gentleman says. Let us just conduct our own simulation here. Here is an incoming missile. Is there going to be a beacon on an incoming missile?

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.