of task forces or councils established by the president and headed by a czar. it seems to an awful lot of people in this country, the term czar means absolute power and they have created these positions of absolute power without oversight. start with my friend from georgia. mr. westmoreland: i thank my friend from texas for yielding. and the czars is something i have been getting a lot of questions about. i'm starting to get questions. people are wondering who these 34 or 35r czars are. and we have had one exposed to the extent that he eventually resigned. people are starting to understand more and more that are these czars are being appointed by the president with no confirmation by the senate. and they're beginning to say, hey, how is this happening?

what's going on here? how long are they going to serve? do they work directly for the president? who are they accountable to? what if they have some type of job that's under ms. mrs. napolitano: or under geithner or whatever. who do they report to? what's the deal? they report directly to the president. . so we need, really, sunshine on all the appointment, but especially as the gentleman from louisiana, h.r. 3569, it leads to sunset on all these czars. so you know, this is something that the american people are very inquisitive about. i think that because of the number of these czars and because of some of the really communist views and really

ultra left wing views that some of these czars have that are being exposed, it's just bringing more and more attention to it. i think the american people want some accountability. i'll go back to the statement, you know, they're sick and tired of being sick and tired of more government being stacked on. we've got a 10% unemployment nationwide. we've got some areas with 15%, 16%, 20% unemployment. the only jobs growing right now is in the federal government. that's the only thing growing. so with that, judge, i hope that anybody that could be watching might encourage their representative to look at h.r. 3569. i yield back the balance. mr. carter: we're just about to run out of time. we had a surprise guest come from the back of the room. would you like to tell us about the czars? did we stimulate you? >> you sure did, judge.

it's not just who these folks are that we don't know, it's what they step on. this is sort of the fourth or stealth branch of government. i came with, i know of all my colleagues here, my freshman week we came knowing we have a serious responsibility to fulfill on the different committees of jurisdiction we're appointed to. i bring down one example, the car czar. what has happened to the auto industry in this country. and as i can tell, when we have these issues, we have a committee, energy and commerce that would have dealt with the issues surrounding that industry. yet everything that's happened in the car industry of firing an executive from a private organization, to taking over ownership of general motors, to dictating winners and losers in terms of the auto dealerships, all directed under the leadership of a czar.

frankly, i think -- i know that that's the responsibility of congress and we have a responsibility to approach that carefully and judicial liss -- judiciously and make those decisions. the constitution provided us that authority and responsibility. the czars are just stepping all over the constitution. mr. carter: reclaiming my time, thank you, because we feel real good when we call a colleague out of the dark, we're glad you're here. we are about to -- we're about to wrap up time, we're doing something different today. we've been talking about an awful lot. this is probably the most we've talked about in a single hour. as soon as this is over with, as soon as i walk across the street to my office, if you go to www.house.gov/carter. we're going to have a live webcast for the next hour and a half, you can ask questions and make comments about what we

talked about here or that's bothering you or that you're concerned about so you can tell congress. i've already got 300 questions waiting right now. so i'm going to advertise a little bit and welcome people to come to this webcast. how much time have we got left? the speaker pro tempore: one minute. mr. carter: one minute. did you want a minute? ok. well, thank you, everybody, for participating, it's most important you remember the subject of this conversation, the rule of law that holds this society together. never forget, we're all talking about rules and laws and how they seem to be stretched and violated and we've got to get back to the rule of law governing this nation. with that, i yield back. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: i

thank the gentleman. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from illinois, mr. schock is recognized for half the remaining time until midnight. mr. schock: thank you, mr. speaker. we come together tonight to talk about a very important issue, a very important relationship that we enjoy with our only true democratic ally in the middle east, the state of israel, as we've seen in the last week, this issue came to light with the instability in that region, with the new facility just discovered and made public on friday by the united states, great britain, and her allies, this just reinforces in the minds of many of us in congress the importance of us remaining steadfast in making sure that the state of iran, that country

does not receive a nuclear weapon, and that we do all we can to support our allies, the state of israel and peace in that region. i was fortunate to be part of a delegation to travel to israel. in fact, there were 25 members who traveled the first week of august to israel on a fact-finding trip. 25 republicans, which was the largest delegation of republicans ever to visit the state of israel at once, the following week. this is the republican delegation was led by our whip, eric cantor, and the following week, the democrats were led by majority leader steny hoyer. my understanding is there were over 30 democrat members on that trip, the largest number of democratic members to travel through the area at one time. that's over 50 members, well over 10% of the congress, traveling to that region within a two-week period. i think that underscores the importance that this congress believes that relationship is and the need for us to press

for peace and the need for us to support our allies. i want to take some time to reflect on my views of what i learned on that trip and some reflections of what i learned on that trip. also here tonight, i have one of my good friends and allies who has joined me to share his experiences as well, so i would like to take this time to yield to my good friend mr. thompson. mr. thompson: i thank my good friend from illinois for yielding and i thank him for coordinating this time tonight when we truly do talk about our most important ally, a friend that we have and a good democratic friend in a very dangerous part of the world and the -- in the jewish state of israel. it was -- that was visit was, it was a privilege to be able to visit the country of israel and to go with other colleagues

and to go there with an open mind and to be able to sit down and visit with the -- and talk face to face with the president of israel work the prime minister of israel, to meet with the military, to go into the west bank and sit down with the prime minister and the palestinian authority and look at the defense issues that israel lives with each day and has since the beginning of that democratic nation. and to visit all the borders and all sides of israel and to look out into whether it was jordan or syria or lebanon, places where, at one time, or different times during their short history, where missiles rained from and mortars came down on men, women, and children in the state of israel, it's a country that is very familiar and lives every day where defense is is on their mind, and a stong

defense. it was in particular, in -- in particular, it was striking to me when d striking to me when we were down looking over the gaza strip, all the borders are relatively peaceful right now but at the gaza strip, outside the small forming community of ste rat -- of storat, where the israeli people gave up what i thought looked like a pretty good piece of real estate that sat along the mediterranean sea, the gaza strip. they moved the citizens of rail out of there and into other -- relocated them in other places in israel in hopes of obtaining a lasting peace and a long peace for the palestinians and in exchange, what they received was about 3,000 missiles and mortars that came raining down on them.

it was striking, i think, the most striking conversation i had and i know my good friend was there with a young mom of 59-year-old, she has grown up in that farming community, grandparents lived there, parents lived there, she lived her entire life there. she lived through the time when the missiles rained. she talked about how when you're -- and we saw as we were driving into the area, bus stations that looked unusual, because they were designed also as bomb shelters. we saw the playground, which had a great piece of equipment setting in it. my kids are grown now, but they would have loved it, looked like a giant caterpillar, it weaved around. it was actually a bomb shelter for children that they would run to when a siren would sound that a missile was launched. from the time the siren sounds in israel, they have about 20

seconds until that missile lands and explodes. and a young mom, i think, put it so strikingly for me, her words i hear over and over again in my mind, imagine yourself, you're a parent, the siren sounds, you've got 20 seconds to get to safety. you've got two children, both strapped in car seats in the back seat, which one do you pick? i think we take for granted our safety and security in this country. we certainly have had attacks here. we've been relatively safe since 2001 because of the measures that were taken by president bush and by the congress at that point and we have not experienced another attack on our soil in those eight years. but we have -- we certainly have issues that i look forward to talking about further tonight in terms of future threats, to not just our country but the country of israel. i thank my good friend for yielding.

mr. schock: thank you. i share those observations and would like to take the opportunity to share some of my own. first, let me say that i thought the trip to israel reinforced what i had already known, and that was that the israeli citizens want peace. i saw this message on the faces of young soldier, i heard a passionate and thoughtful cry for peace in prime minister netanyahu's words and i prayed for peace with israelis as they ended their prayers on shabat. i found that like every nation in this world, israel is a nation of contrasts. specifically, it's a land hemmed by unambiguous borders, yet filled with lines that have been blurred beyond recognition. new and old, the a owe logical and the military -- the aa logical and militarily strategically, all bundled

together until each lost its idebitity and became part of the -- of the same interwoven fabric. each day's itinerary was left with life-changing events. the oppressive heat which hit me when i stepped off the bus steamed challenge my ideas about israel. while i found our agenda to be filled with the study of distorted line, there were stark lines, stark borders which separated israel from her neighbors and delineated fact from fiction. i found this truth as we toured the wall. i found no ambiguous lines. i was clearly standing at the foundation of modern israel. conversely, i did not hear israel's genesis in the echo of my footsteps through the solemn corridors of yad vashim.

true, i heard an argument against the unforgettable argument against the atrocities that happened when the world's jewry did not have a place to call its own. plainly israel does not exist because of the holocaust. unfortunately, i believe president obama crossed this unmistakable border in his cairo speech, linking the history of israel not to the western wall or mossada, but to the actions of a madman. he imflide israel was thrown together to ease the guilt of a post-world war ii europe. . this is on the faces of the famous photo "paratroopers at the western wall."

it is not caused by adolf but the stability by abraham. the president spoke of mutual respect, but failed to show the israelis the same respect he displayed the palestinians. he spoke of the daily hue mill yation but did not mention the daily fears endured by the residents as they go about their lives in bomb shelters. the president crossed the border between fact and fiction when he put settlement construction on the chip for peace thereby offering cover. this misstep was completely unnecessary. it is well known that israel has no intention of building these settlements. the nation has no intention of stopping normal life in the settlement. and unfortunately, the president

inadvertently called for the latter. admittedly, this is a difficult topic for us to understand and it was only on my trip that i realized the line between israeli parents and grown children is much more blurred than it is here in the united states. i love my mother dearly, yet i do not wish to have her live right next door to me. but, however, many israelis want that. they want to walk to their father's house for shabat. settlements need natural growth, but this term is a misnomer. the settlements have no intention of growing. i sted they want a natural filling in of the existing land and want their son to be able to build a house on the vacant lot next to their home. to do this is to deprive them.

i wish president obama toured the settlement with us so he could have learned this lesson himself. the president also needs to learn that the world cannot preach on high to israel. when the president tours united states cities, he doesn't encounter bus stops that doubles as bomb shelters. when he sees students around the white house, he doesn't see assault rifles. he does not live in fear. and do to these facts, the president doesn't have the capability to lecture israel on what she must do to keep peace or make her citizens safe. finally, i turn my attention to the larger topic facing israel, the iranian threat. using more than 7,000 centrifuges, tie ran has amassed enough uranium to produce a nuclear device.

it will produce two atomic weapons each year. never before, not india, not pakistan, not even north korea has a group of criminals so defiant of international criminal law have such destructive capabilities and as the people of iran have become more vocal, the ayotollahs have become unpredictable and we must act to end this danger. without a doubt, the united states has failed to do enough to stop iran of becoming a proud owner of the bomb. it is true, congress has taken a multitude of votes on this issue. however, the majority of these were simply press releases diss guised as legislation. to write right this wrong i have added my name in support of multiple bills this year to strengthen sanctions against

iran. by no means are these sufficient. the united states must use enlateral and multilateral tool it has at its disposal to cut off iran diplomatically until this shadow of a state abandons its goals. these actions can only help make iran make the decisions sooner. iran must be if it can withstand peace, prosperity and the international community or live in object security, relegated to the trash heap of the international community with the other junta's regime. when i think about the threat of iran, i'm reminded of the saying that those who do not study history are destinned to repeat it. i'm reminded of my tour of yad vashim. i recall history.

i remember a leader who perverted a religion to justify his actions and i'm reminded of the famous edmund burke who once said the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing, which is exactly what too many christian leaders did in that day, nothing. this erie similarity exists today, not with the leader who quotes the bible, but with one who quotes the koran. his comments echos those of hitler's. his stated goal is the same. so what is necessary for peace? i would contend that there will be no peace until leaders around the world, regardless of faith denounce this, until leaders within the muslim community reject this rhetoric and leaders of the islamic state sean such hate speech.

whether someone builds a second home within a defined community does not withstand between war and peace. a community of citizens who prefer religion to justify hate and murder stand in the way of peace. this is what we should all fear. it was radical islamic terrorists who attacked the united states on september 11, who blew up subways in the u.k. this ideology is the true barrier to peace. i'm reminded of the note that was left by the terrorists in spain during the madrid bombings. they said, we will win and you will lose because you love life and we seek death. therein lies the real problem with iran. unlike the threat of mutual destruction during the cold war with russia and the u.s. both knowing if one attacked the

other would retaliate, we are dealing with a regime who is not a socialist state like russia, but a religious state whose leaders don't fear death but rather a defined goal to destroy israel. this threat must be at the center of the president and congress's attention for the sake of israel's security and also for the sake of our own. settlements, the west bank and a president who seems interested in giving dictation than providing assistance, when spoken allowed, these problems seem rather insurmountable. i believe they are not. there is a path to peace, which is as clear as the border formed by the security barriers. we only need to have the courage to take the first step on this path by ensuring israel that is our unden yible support. fortunately, we are not alone.

the vast majority of americans support israel. we recognize in a israel stands alone as a lone beachhead in the middle east. we take our security for granted and do not judge those who are not afforded this luxury. regardless of the muted minds within israel, we know where the stark borders are between our supporters and detractors in the middle east. during our meeting with perez, he said, israel and her neighbors, we seem to be able to live in peace. we just have a problem with writing it down. focusing on the real threat to peace and democracy around the world requiring leadership on the part of the arab states to root out terrorists within their borders and continuing to support and stand by our ally in the region as mr. netanyahu definitively stated, with god's

help, we will know no more war, we will know peace. with that, i would like to yield some time to my good friend from the state of louisiana, dr. fleming, for his impressions of his trip to israel and the state in the region there in the middle east. mr. fleming: i thank you, my friend and gentleman from illinois, mr. shock. that is correct, illinois, right? you looked up and i thought, i might have the wrong state. yes, you know as the three of us here this evening spent really an awesome time in israel during august, but i want to take you back in time, mr. speaker in history, 71 years to today, literally 71 years to the day. and what do we see in the news reels? and that was that lord

chamberlain waved a stack of papers in front of the camera and he uttered, we have peace of our time. and what was he talking about? he had just come from a meeting with adolph hitler and they had along with france and a few other nations, they had come to an agreement to cede to hitler the strategic part of c zechoslavakia. hitler claimed it was populated with germans, but lord chamberlain agreed to let him have that. and we know that today as a

policy of apiecement. he actually went there for the purpose of honor and peace. and then then winston churchill who was in the parliament replied that he went there for honor and peace but returned with neither. within months, hitler began a very aggressive campaign and went on to not only take mole and and as we say -- poland and the rest is history. there were 20 million people killed during world war ii, mr. speaker. six million of them were jews. and in visiting the holocaust museum in israel, in jerusalem,

something very interesting occurred in my mind that i never thought about until it was brought out. we saw a lot of very interesting things there. a lot of personal stories about families who were broken apart, most of whom died in the holocaust, people who were in death camps, a lot of personal letters and books and eye glasses and things like that that told individual stories. we know the factual parts of this. we have all seen the documentaries that talk about the gas chambers and the ovens and we, of course, have heard about and read about the final solution and hitler's attempt to take executing human beings to a whole new scientific level which he was able to achieve. nothing before, nothing since has been done. but you know, the important thing, mr. speaker about this is

we must understand that really teaches us a second lesson today, the first one become the danger of appeasement that while the jews were being carted off to death camps and many of them attempting to reach safe haven in the united states and were denied that and in many cases thrown out of many countries, there was no one to speak up for the jews, no one, not even the united states. we turned our backs on the jews. and there was no state, no country to speak up for the jews who, at that time, lived in many places of the world. and because of that after world war ii and all the countries began to come together, it was decided that the jews would have their own homeland and we know

that the u.n. provided for that and what was then called palestine is today called israel. israel is a state and that's so important. because now, the jews have a country to stick up for them. they have a people who will never back down from an evil dictator like hitler. they will stand up for their people. and they will stand up as our ally against these things. but, you know the interesting thing is, it's often said is what we don't learn from history is destinned to repeat itself. and what we have today is a hitler-like figure, mr. speaker. of course, ahmadinejad, who is saying many of the same things that hitler said during those days, giving the same threats. you know, very few people took hitler seriously when he said he intended to kill the jews and

yet that's precisely what he did. and yet, today, we have ahmadinejad, who is making the same statements and we watch before our very eyes, he is building a nuclear arsenal. and what are we doing, mr. speaker? well, we're talking about sanctions and how effective are these sanctions going to be when it's necessary to have russia and china to help us with that and of course, all we're getting from them is rhetoric. in fact, the only thing that has been done in all this discussion is we have given up missile defense in the czech republic and in poland. so we are already beginning the process in this world while we have another hitler-like figure out there beginning to plan the destruction of the jews once again. . so i think we need to stand,

mr. speaker, with our brothers and sisters in rail in their protection because in -- in israel in their protection, because ins a much as israel -- inasmuch as israel is able to take care of itself, there's no way israel can protect itself from an intercontinental ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead and that's precisely what iran is doing today. apart from that, iran is exporting terrorism around the world. we know that hamas and hezbollah, that al qaeda, who is providing al qaeda with the weapons they're using to kill our own sons and daughters. again, it's iran. so iran is emerging as, i guess, ahmadinejad and certainly the mullahs behind him are really, i think,

showing a tremendous parallel to preworld war ii germany. i think we need to learn from the lessons of the past, that is, number one, we should never allow a policy of appeasement. it never gives peace and it never gives honor, it always leads to war. it's always a matter of people overseas, folks who really are out for the destruction of others, it gives them an opening to attack other countries, and then secondly, that never again should israel be without its own country, and certainly without its friends around the world. never again should we have a situation, mr. speaker, as we did during world war ii. that was a holocaust, which of course we know that ahmadinejad denies to this day.

and you know, there are many that say, look, this is just a little strip of land out in the middle of the desert, you've got arabs and jews fighting over this little land, really, if you think about it, the jews occupied this land as far back as 3500 b.c. islam didn't even come into existence until thousands of years later. in fact we know that christianity started even before islam. so of course there's been three major religions that have existed there and still exist there today and as far as i'm concerned, they can exist forever. but i think that there's no reason to think that there isn't a legitimate right for israel to claim that as its own state. in summary, and in this kind of, i think, to tie it all tooth, mr. speaker, we talked about the issue of the two-state solution, and mr.

netanyahu believes that is the way to go, we should have two state a palestinian state and jewish state. but remember that israel is a democracy. just simply by being outgrown by palestinians or muslims, it would lose its status as a jewish state. i think that it's essential we not only support the two-state solution in supporting israel, but that we support the right for israel to exist as a jewish state and always will. so with that, i will -- >> will the gentleman yield for a question? or actually, both my colleagues. when we were there, we had an opportunity to visit a number of settlements and i've been distressed that our president, president obama, has been almost dictating that israel give up part of its sovereign

nation, these settlements. we were there, we walked them. we saw the strategic location of them. i wanted to get your impressions of what your thoughts were. should israel be -- give in to that direction and give up its sovereign land, those settlements it has today? mr. fleming: if the gentleman would yield back, i would say that my first impression, beyond the fact that israel is such a lovely country, just gorgeous, right in the middle of the desert, next to the mediterranean sea, and of course we were able to see the dead sea and of course many sites that are holy to us as christians. but just how small that country is. like a postage stamp. as narrow as five miles. at its waist. we saw a patchwork of villages, one being a palestinian, one

being jewish, all throughout the country. and even though often cases there were check points and fences between them, you couldn't really see that. all you could see looking over is, you would see evidence of a palestinian village and evidence of a jewish village, all sitting there peacefully, almost difficult to believe how much war and how much violence has existed there for so long. of course, with that, we visited sterote, which is, i guess, a flash point, where there's been rockets hurled and that sort of thing. that was really what i found to be very impressive. mr. thompson: would the gentleman yield again? it struck me that many of those settlements are strategic locations, high ground, from which terrorist the palestinians lobbed missiles

and rockets into -- onto the men, women, and children of israel. those were taken as part of the war in, i think, 1948. frankly, they're extremely important areas to hold onto. i kind of think of the -- as i think about from our president, president obama, dictating to the israeli nation that they should give up the space, it's a little bit like somebody coming up and saying, ok, now you need to give back new mexico, california, and nevada to the sovereign nation of mexico. we wouldn't stand for that. i would certainly hope the sovereign jewish nation of israel would not stand for that as well. >> would the gentleman yields? mr. thompson: please. mr. schock: to your point, i think what you're suggesting is, number one, should any of these properties be, quote, given back or surrendered, but number two, should that be the focus of our effort toward peace? it seems to me disingenuous on

the part of our administration to suggest that somehow what stands between the current situation and a road to peace is the issue of settlement is really a misnomer. the reality is that the state of israel has shown throughout their short history have bargained in good faith and have, time and again, shown the willingness to give up land. you mention what you saw with the bomb shelters and people who have suffered as a result of them giving up the gaza strip. but the issue of is israel really willing to give up this settlement or that settlement or redraw boundaries, you and i both heard mr. netanyahu's words, they're not wedded to any boundaries but you heard if the palestinian authority, which was his unwillingtons accept israel as a jewish state.

therein lies the real problem with a pathway to peace and a two-state solution in the palestinian unwillingness to recognize israel as a jewish state. i'd only also add that while we're talking about settlements, iran continues to march toward acquire agnew clear weapon and while i certainly respect this administration's plan to begin talks and to negotiate and to try and solve this diplomatically, i would remind the american people and my colleagues here that this is the same administration who we want to talk to that has lied to the international community and hidden from them a nuclear facility which the world was just made aware of just last week. so i would only question the sincerity and the ability for us to truly negotiate with trust with this regime who up until last weekend we were not

even aware of an additional nuclear facility. it's very alarming. i don't know what my distinguished colleagues here feel, but you know, we have two bills still in this chamber, house resolution 2194, which is the iran refined petroleum sanctions act and the iran sanctions enabling act, house resolution 1327. bolt of those bills have a majority of members of congress supporting them. and it just seems to me a shame that this body has not acted on that legislation to put another tool in the chest of president obama as he goes forward to negotiate with iran, the fact that the sanctions are there, if and when they become necessary to use. i would just yield back. mr. thompson: i thank you for naming those pieces of legislation.

they are extremely important and they have the support of this entire chamber. i would ask the speaker's support to bring that bill to the floor so we can do the right thing by this most important ally that we have in the middle east and would serve the needs -- i think what you've talked about tonight really, most recently addresses the most immediate threat in israel and i think the most immediate threat to the united states that is the situation in iran. we -- mr. speaker, iran has recently resthreeled development of a secret nuclear facility. iran's admission of the operations of a secret nuclear facility is a serious problem and a serious threat. while this new revelation is alarming, it's not unexpected. iran has deceived the world time and time again. any attempts to assure the world that their nuclear program is peaceful should be seen for what it is, that's just another lie. mr. speaker, it's time to impose meaningful sanctions on

the iranian government. we have legislation that's been drafted and introduced and has the support of the majority members of this chamber. we must not continue a foreign policy that extends the hand of cooperation to our enemies while they continue dangerous acts of deception. if the facility, the nuclear facility was designed for familiar purposes why did they hide its existence? we must protect america's allies. the confirmation of this secret nuclear facility -- facility is troubling, especially at a time just days after the obama administration announced plans to abandon the placement of a missile defense system in the czech republic and poland because russia was not happy with the idea. only a year since russia invaded georgia and 70 years to

the day since the soviet union invaded poland, the administration announced the dismantling of one of our most important missile defense systems at the expense of our allies. mr. speaker, the abandonment of the european missile defense site which could have protected the homeland of the united states against iranian long-range missiles is unacceptable. as i was talking with the -- one of the chairs of the missile defense caucus in this body, he described to me that we do have -- there's a plan for a better system to be put in place. however, that new defense missile -- missile defense program will not be operational until 2018 or 2020. while we do have other missile defense shields in place, it will remain he described it like this it's like trying to bring down an airplane with a

baseball. i suppose it could be possible, but it's a one in a million chance. when you think of intercontinental ballistic missiles that travel at a speed of 10,000 miles per hour, to me it's unacceptable at this point in time in our history when we have threats that are -- that sometimes come from other countries such as iran, sometimes from terrorists that hold no national identity, and it's alarming to me that we're taking down this missile defense. mr. fleming: would the gentleman yield on that point? i appreciate the gentleman pointing out the fact that what we're doing in fact is removing a missile shield. . it would be something that would

help defend much of that region of the country, including 808 american military bases. and instead, we're going to exchange it for a whole different -- a ship-based system, which requires first of all, a lot of development that's not yet in place as we point out. it's going to be another decade before it would be capable. it would be require ships being in the right place at the right time and begs the point. if iran is developing nuclear material just for civilian purposes, why do they need all of this ability? they have just ran a test, three rocket tests, one of which had a range of 1,500 miles. why do you need that? i'm pretty sure iran is not planning to go to the moon. for what purpose is that? and what is ironic is the fact

that our president is talking about renewing the star treaty and takeing our nuclear weapons down to another level. at the same time, there are more countries that have more nuclear weapons and more capability to deliver those weapons than ever. again, it goes back to the appeasement, does it make sense to -- our enemies are killing our men and women through their proxies and surrogates and weapons, why in the world would we be doing that when we have a growing threat from them? and going back to israel, it seems that wherever you see the u.s. military around the world, peace breaks out. i mean, you look at world war ii. troops were in japan.

troops were in the philippines. they were in france. they were in england, germany. all those countries now, very peaceful democracies. and we went into iraq and iraq is evolving into an oasis of dem, as is israel. so it seems to me that we need to stay on the same post-world war ii course of certainly using teddy roosevelt's old philosophy and that is speak softly, but carry a big stick rather than using a lot of rhetoric about all the things that we want to do and all of the sanctions we want to take and yet disarm ourselves and our friends at the same time. and certainly, one only has to ask around the world who is happy with us right now and who isn't. it turns out our friends are

unhappy with us and our enemies are happy with us, all the way from venezuela to iran to russia, they are happy with everything we have been doing lately and the decisions our president has been making. we found out that the president has a 4% favor built rating in israel. they are unhappy with his position on iran right now and also on the palestinian question. so i think that it's certainly nice to be liked overseas, but when you are liked by your enemies and also the bsh poland and the czech republic are unhappy with us right now because we left them in the dust after agreeing to put a missle shield there and pulling out after they have gone out on a limb for us, i think we are going in the wrong direction in the way we deal with our friends and enemies in around this question of iran and nuclear

weapons that they have and with that, i yield back to my friends. mr. shock: i agree. and it's important that we impress on this body the importance that we take up the legislation that we mentioned earlier dealing with sanctions, but also we raised this issue in this body. you know, we have been so focused on the issue of health care the last couple of months. and while this is an important issue that the president has made throughout the past year, the reality is we need to look no further than september 11 to know that this country is not safe if our allies are not safe and that did terrorism is allowed to breed around the world that really nothing else matters and that nothing can be more detrimental to our economy and our way of life than for terrorism to breed, to be successful and be able to attack democracy as we saw with our markets after september 11, the great job loss and the tumble it

took. we need to remain vigilant in not only keeping our country safe and supporting our allies and our friends have spent some time talking about this important issue which has been raised last week by the discovery of this facility that the state of iran has attempted to keep from the international community. and one has to ask the question why. if their intentions are what they say theyr pure and simple, if their intentions are non nuclear or nonweapons grade, if their intentions are to provide energy to their people, certainly, that is not something that requires the dark of night or secrets. that is something you would think that one would be happy for for full disclosure. our own estimates suggest that the centrifuges in that facility are not designed to produce

energy-grade uranium, but rather weapons-grade uranium. i think it adds to the doubt in many of our minds and the concern for our president to move rather quickly for if not this facility, perhaps some others that we don't know about that are still out there. i thank the gentlemen for being here tonight and sharing our perspectives on our trip to israel and stressing the importance of us taking up the issue of iran and dealing very swiftly with sanctions and if not sanctions, supporting israel's efforts to stop a nuclear iran. mr. fleming: i thank congressman shock for having this special order hour so we could talk about this important issue and it's one we're going to be talking about a lot more in the coming days because it's pretty apparent that all of these issues are beginning to line up,

beginning to stack up very rapidly and of course the issue that we know our friends in israel are facing is that if we are unable to bring the iranians to the negotiating table or to have sanctions that work, then there is still the last option left on the table which they reserve the right as a sovereign nation to do and that is to potentially take out the nuclear facilities in iran. we pray that it doesn't come to that. but it has already, of course, in syria and iraq back in hussein days and we are looking for a peaceful solution. but we have counterweight around the world in russia and china that as soon as we try to do one thing, they want to reverse it. russia is a very significant trading partner with iran. they're providing iran with the

state of of-the-art missle system which is going to close the window of the capability of israel to attack iran's nuclear facilities if theads to be done which is all the more important why decisions are having to be made at even faster pace. i thank you, mr. shock, for bringing us together for this hour. mr. shock: thank you, dr. fleming for being here. mr. thompson: i want to thank my good friend from illinois and good friend from louisiana for being here tonight and the constitution, when we were sworn in back in january, we placed our hand on the table, we swore to uphold and defend that constitution. one of the first responsibilities is for common defense. and i think that is the most important responsibility that we have as members of congress is safety and security.

and this is all about safety and security. frankly, history shows and we know that a strong defense is a strong deterrent. we want peace. we pray for peace. i long for a day when the whole world is at peace, but we need a strong defense to achieve peace and i'm hopeful we will see the day and i believe it was the president of israel who longs for a day while rising out of the desert, we see buildings and not missles and we know that the economic impact that we have peace that we can all secure. mr. shock, thank you for coordinating this evening. mr. shock: mr. speaker, i would yield back. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois for a motion. mr. shock: mr. speaker, i would move for adjournment. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m.

join this friday evening for a special preview from the college of william and mary, including a moot argument about sentencing juveniles. that is live on c-span, friday and 6:00 p.m. eastern. >> cpm, the supreme court way, is just a week away.

get an insider's view of the people and places that make of the nation's highest court. >> why is it that we have an elegant, imposing structure? it is to remind us that we have an important function. it is to remind the public of the importance and centrality of the law. >> supreme court weak start sunday october 4 on c-span. to complement our original production, we offered teachers free resources on the judicial system at c-span.org. >> the senate finance committee continues work this week on a health-care bill proposed by chairman max baucus but of the bill does not include a so- called government from public option. members considered several amendments that would have added a public option to the bill,