let me repeat, yes, israel has also violated these areas. all the while, israel refuses to review the economic agreements that control the ability of the palestinian economy to develop and become independent, thus, it is determined to impose dominance on palestinian economy, similar to its military and security dominance. i repeat, economic, military, and security dominance, thus israel rejecting the right of the palestinian people to development and to exploit their natural resources, thus israel has destroyed the foundations upon which the political and security agreements are based, which have also been undermined by the measures taken by subsequent israeli governments that have negated the transition of recognizing our state, and thus perpetrated gross violations. all of this has made the situation unsustainable. thus, and given all that -- given that background, here we declare that as long as israel refuses to commit to the agreement signed with us, which render us and a pro forma power without real powers, and as long as israel refuse

in the west bank, certainly where israel has a presence in the gaza strip, israel is surrounding the gaza strip, imprisoning, some would say, the gaza strip, but obviously doesn't have any presence in the immediate area. that was definitely the bomb shell. i think it really matters now whether it is implemented by the palestinians and exactly how it is going to be implemented. for example, the palestinian police force that pat roles some of these areas, is he going to say, no, go home. let the israelis patrol that area? that's not clear to me. what is clear that he made a strong call there, that there should be no violence associated with this move. but i think there has certainly been the threat there many times before. and he said the oslo accords are effectively dead before. now he is saying we're not going to respect them, and you run it all. i think it's also worth remarking that there is somewhat of an cotra diction with the early part of the speech where he said everyone should recognize palestine as the state, and what we're going to see, which is the flying of the palestinia

times did change coverage on israel and addison works for the republicans on behalf of the pro-israel lobby they openly law the idea of buying the new york times which to me is not exactly an anti zionist passed in but democrats under bill clinton were consolidated as the base of perot israel supported heavily funded as such and hillary clinton represents that wing of the democratic party, supports the iran deal, but we have to understand the implications of the iran deal for palestinians, implications on the ground, barack obama represents this element of the democratic party. obama claimed gold on my year was one of the great inspiration's, this wonderful multicultural list his said palestinians don't exist in milwaukee accented hebrew. we see all sorts of pandering, because hillary clinton wants to support the iran deal she issue a personal letter probably written by some a pack oriented functionary, promising to take on the campaign trail land while president, to basically take on the speech of americans, to take on a grass roots human-rights movement, this is her concession. i do

it's interesting that on one hand we have israel has broken the system, so israel can now run it.n the other we have the flag flying at the palestinian--at the united nations, and all countries in the world should recognize palestine, david. >> james, thank you very much, indeed. the palestinian flag now to palestinian territory. on the occupied west bank. my colleague is in ramallah. often when you have a politician giving a major speech it's up to officials to come out afterwards and say this is what we really mean. this is the details that mattered. have you had any of that from people involved with the palestinian authority who are still there in the occupied west bank but not in the united nations? >> not a huge amount. we do--we have heard from analysts who are parsing through that speech, seizing on that specific line where mr. abbas said that they are no longer bound to these agreements. however, there is the caveat at the end of that sentence, which is as long as israel is not committed to them. i think that's the most important thing here so as long israel isn't committe

when it comes to israel, i ran employees -- against israel at every turn. it is it demonstrating the will and capability to strike out against the west and through proxies and cyber attacks at her allies like israel and saudi arabia. what this deal won't do is alter iran's value. what it will do is give i ran an even greater ability to follow through on these threats. so we cannot allow i ran to be empowered as the nuclear threshold state armed with billions in sanctions relief with at least providing some protection, some protection to israel first. where it least demanding the release of americans who languished in iranian custody for years. first, let's at least agree on that. i understand the strong position in the senate, the bipartisan majority opposed a partisan minority in favor over the broader iranian deal. but at the very least mr. president, at the very least, we should be able to come together over the boat we will take today and so i would urge all of my colleagues to vote for it. >> the democratic leader. >> the senate has spoken make it abso

israel accepted this plan. we wanted to live side by side with peace and stability and security and prosperity with our neighbors. this is our land, we believe that also, there is room for their land as well. but we cannot take ownership of the palestinian refugees because it is not our responsibility. we offered our hand in peace to them. unfortunately, they were leaders who were irresponsible. they attacked us in a civil war. palestine. there was a civil war between the jews of palestine and the arab of palestine which caused the problem of their refugees. and right now we are not talking about the -- there is no right of return, because there was an act of aggression. not by us. we're talking about third and fourth generations that have nothing to do with being israelis. you know ali after world war ii and before even, there were tens of millions of refugees, hungarians and russians and germans and whatever in europe. nobody asked to return back to where they started and they were absorbed by their countries

israel is constantly attack the. and the target about getting iran to agree to limitations on the programme. >> it is unusual that portions of american jews supporting the deal are greater. >> supporting the gal is greater. >> you saidar stated a pugh research. the project which is against the deal. polls show 40% of american juice support the deal, it's double the number of pugh. it's hard to tale. no poll showed 80% against the deal. tas an important segment. this deal effects us and the jewish state because of iran's threat against the jewish community, that's why it's active and polarized. we faced a genocide 70 years ago and are confeud why we are the target. why does iran threaten israel with gen sigh. it will park a divisive debate. >> we grow an that, that it's boek fo there to be american jews that support the development. it doesn't make them sell outs. >> i never said anything like that. i believe the more debates, the healthier, more debates are coming out. there should be a vote in the senate. i believe

martin: israel. effort in very clear your speech to say it's time for healing, it's time to come together. when you're president that you would have the prime minister there in your first month. and that's very consistent, as i think you said in your speech, with your approach which has always been to put your arm around prime minister netanyahu rather than -- secretary clinton: or any prime minister. [laughter] martin: and as you know, that's a policy that i support too, but some of my friends in israel recently have said that's not the way to deal with us. we need tough love which is the alternative. instead of rewarding bad behavior, you should be really speaking tough -- more toughly to us. how do you respond to that? secretary clinton: well, i think there is a lot of room for tough love, particularly in private and behind, you know, closed doors. as i write in my book, certainly prime minister netanyahu and i had very vigorous conversations that have gone on in person and over the phone. but i j

do you love israel? let me hear you say it. israel. israel. israel. mr., you may have forgotten your promises, but we have not. and we will stand with israel. join us. this is a bad deal. tell him it's a bad deal. bad deal. deal. vote no. thank you. ♪ >> deal. vote no. well, we need to alway context. before i do this i just want to say you know how i know god is on our side right now? because the sun is behind those clouds. thank god for that. our next speaker will give us some greater context in all of this. he is a former director of central intelligence. i want to make sure i get this correct. he is the chairman of the foundation for defense of democracy. im woolsy. deal. ♪ >> thank you. it's an honor to be with you today. this agreement that is being discussed is not an ordinary agreement. it is not an agreement where the two parties actually negotiate. and there's quid pro quos and deals here and there. no. we are the subject of an attempt to get us to submit. iran is totally about the business of requiring submission. and they do it with dominance,

-israel relationship. fighting as strongly as anyone in the congress for the survival and security of the state of israel. he, like i, believe that support for the joint comprehensive plan of action is not only in america's security interest, but it is in israel's security interest as well. what's not well-known is that the critical strategic work that then majority leader reid played from 2009 through 2012 in ensuring that binding far reaching sanctions were enacted and done so in a way that maximized president obama's ability to put together a far-reaching international coalition in support of sanctions. he wasn't the author of these sanctions bills. his name doesn't appear in the newspapers and discussions about him, but he was seized with the critical importance of preventing iran from having a nuclear weapons capability, and devoted great time and leadership to making this happen. it's not often a house member gets a call from the senate majority leader to discuss legislative strategy on a bill not au

. -- attacked the state of israel. while the obama administration was giving away our ability to dismantle iran's nuclear program, iran was propping up bash ar al asad, giving rise to isil, the world's most devastating humanitarian crisis, unfolds before our eyes. while our negotiators were giving up on anytime, anywhere inspections, iran was destabilizing iraq, reviving sectarian tensions with its shiite militia, pachinge the way for isil to move in and undo the gains made by american troops. while president obama was backing down from every single negotiating objective he had laid out, iran was taking down the government of yemen through their proxies, the hudeys. they toppled this pro-u.s. government and crippled our ability to monitor al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. in short, iran set the entire middle east on fire, taking over four arab capitals and creating conditions for the most devastating and sophisticated attacks against our homeland, all while negotiating with the obama administration. and what did they

diplomatically, our support for israel also remains rocksolid. as we continue to oppose every effort to delegitimize a jewish biasedr to pass resolutions against it in international bodies. i understand personally there is no way to overstate the concern in israel about iran and about the potential consequences that this agreement or rejecting this agreement might have on israel's security. the fragility of israel's is a should has been brought home to me on every one of the many trips i have made to that country. state,, as secretary of i have already traveled to israel more than a dozen times, spending the equal length of a full month there. even ordering my plane to land at ben gurion airport when commercial aircraft had been halted during the last house a war, doing so specifically as a sign of support. have walkears, i through yap i showed, a living memorial to the 6 million lost, and i have felt in my bones the unfathomable evil of the holocaust and the undying reminder never to forget. i have climbed inside a shelter where children were fo

to destroy israel. when you are dealing with somebody who embraces an end of , whatttitude towards life makes you think that is a deterrent? all i can say is that if i was in israel, i would be very worried that my chief antagonist on the planet now has the capability to do what they chant continuously. the one thing you can say about chamberlain, at least hitler lied. at least he told him this is all i want. you cannot say that about this deal. the ink is not even dry, and they still chance death to america, death to israel. what i would suggest, ladies and gentlemen, if you are looking to us, and created a deterrent for us, you made a huge mistake. why should we put that burden on our friends in israel? that is not the answer to this dilemma to assume that israel will deter iran. the answer to this dilemma is to make sure that america reasserts herself. time to set the world back in order before it gets completely out of hand. one thing i can say about israel a new beer weapons. -- and nuclear weapons

israel does not want to be occupying. israel does not want to be dealing with palestinian civil affairs. the palestinian authority has been doing that now for 22 years and will continue to do that despite abbas' speech. this was a speech by a man on his way out. there is going to be a palestinian election eventually that the palestinian people deserve. they haven't had an election for the president in more than a decade. there are younger leaders who are willing to talk to israel who will hopefully make the sacrifice as necessary to help their own people that abbas was unfortunately unwilling to make. >> isn't the truth one of the reasons that abbas is on his way out, is the fight that he has been able to make no progress as far as the palestinian people are concerned whatsoever with moving things forward with israel. we've had the rebuild, the building of new settlements in the occupied west bank. his people are unhappy israel does not appear to be the partner for peace that he thought he might be. >> i don't think you'r

in israel, sharon defeats barak.e comes down hard on palestinian terrorists, but then condemns jewish occupation of arab land. president arafat appoints mahmoud abbas as prime minister without any real constituency. and after standing back for two years, u.s. president george w. bush specifically calls for a palestinian state as part of the so-called "roadmap for peace." squeezed between hamas on one side and jewish settlers on the other, moderates on all sides wonder if these are the men to finally make jerusalem the capital of two states. in the region of northern africa and southwestern asia, turkey is one of the most strategically located countries in the world. americans learned why when turkey did not allow the u.s. access to invade neighboring iraq, despite nato membership and an offer of $6 billion. but turkey was torn, as they are on many other issues. are they european or asian? are they secular or islamist? are they democratic or authoritarian? are they urban or rural? here we explore the regional geograph

death to israel, one of our allies. they still support terror groups, we just heard from the hairman of the committee, of all the terror groups they will be able to support after this deal is done. they're still governed by fanatics hell-bent on spreading their perverted view of their faith. now, is this a nation we should choose to strike a deal with? to make a nuclear deal? to those people who say they support this, i'd like you to make sure you have confidence in the people we're making a deal with. you know, i don't know what the rest of the world calls a deal. but generally when you make a deal, both sides kind of have some kind of benefit. i can see all kinds of things that we're giving to these folks, including a big bucket full of money, billions of dollars to iran. we're basically giving them everything that they desired as far as going forward. our inspections are questionable. and then -- but my question is, what is the united states of america getting out of this deal? getting a promise from a regime 50-year

israel. israel. israel. mr. president, you may have forgotten your promises, but we have not.. join us. this is a bad deal. tell him. this is a bad deal. vote no. thank you. ♪ >> well, we need to always get contact before i do this i went to say you know how i know god is on our side right now? be set-- because the sun is behind those clouds. [cheers and applause] >> thank god for that. our next speaker will give us greater context in this. he's a former director of central intelligence and went to make sure i get this correct, he is the chairman of the foundation for defense of democracy, jim woolsey. ♪ >> thank you. it's an honor to be with you today. disagreement that is being discussed is not an ordinary agreement. it's not an agreement where the two parties actually negotiate. there is quid pro quo deals here there, no. we are the subjects of an attempt to get us to submit. iran is totally about the business of requiring submission. they do it with the dominance. they do it with money. they do it with terrorism and that they are in the process of moving to be able to do i

-israel relationship. we must reinvigorate the bipartisan consensus which has been the foundation of america's relationship with israel. and we must ensure that israel is able to maintain its qualitative military edge and its ability to defend itself. the world is watching us this week. the united states is being looked to. not for rhetoric and outrage, but for leadership and resolve. so let's present our arguments and cast our votes. then let's work together to move forward in a productive way. i appreciate how we've worked together on the foreign affairs committee, with chairman royce. i thank you, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. royce. mr. royce: mr. speaker, i appreciate the bipartisan relationship that all of the members on the foreign affairs committee have. but especially today. the words of mr. engel, that every member of this house should be mindful, that

we cannot abandon israel. let history record that i stand against this weak and dangerous deal with the regime that hates the u.s. and hates israel. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. mr. connolly: i yield the distinguished gentlewoman from maryland, ms. edwards, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from maryland for three minutes. ms. edwards: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support of the resolution approving the joint comprehensive plan of action regarding the nuclear program of iran, negotiated by the obama administration in concert with five other nations, the p-5 plus one. i want to commend president obama, secretary kerry, undersecretary sherman, sec remare moniz and their entire teams for their leadership and continued persistent engagement with international partners and members of co

you better stand with israel.going to work him like a pu ppet master. >> my message is simple. no retreat. no retreat. no retreat. no retreat. go blessd you all. >> god bless you. ♪ >> we are joined by sergeant robert with veterans against the deal. ♪ >> hello. what a strong crowd we have fear in this heat. you stand with me and still believe in america. [cheers] so do i. i am still here. me, and by theed life of god i came back to three times. it took a guy who didn't have a lip or jaw and making a speaker to bring him through. him speaking to your hearts today? i am not a polished speaker. that if there you is breath in my lungs, i will continue to fight for you. i will stand here and never let those congressmen and senators who voted for this deal ever forget if they turn their back on staff sergeant brooke, who gave his life to these girls could life in peace and have them kind of future. we must remember those who have fallen before us and take them with us wherever we go. prayersrget them, their in heaven wi

ties with israel. we have cultural ties with israel. bonds betweenlogy a very vibrant technology community in israel and here in the united states. hasome county of fairfax been very active in dealing with technology in israel. cooperationmilitary , you said that no israeli soldier fought in the gulf wars, well that was because we did not want them to. you may recall, take the first gulf war when president george h w bush was president, we went to great lengths to try to provide defensive protection to israel when saddam hussein was sending -- scuds intorael israel. we needed to make sure that did not happen or it and to israel's credit, they exercise in or miss self-restraint -- they exercise enormous self restraint. the bond is deep, it involves technology, the economy, military. i think a relationship of in a sea of ac -- instability in the region. we need to find a path towards these. of time onnt a lot that process with the netanyahu government. his commitment to peace was certainly in question du

for israel. guess what? nobody in israel agrees with you, who is in the current government. everybody who is in the current coalition government understands this is not a good deal for israel. why don't you listen to them? you want it to be a good deal for israel. well, it's not. and you wanting it doesn't change it. so let's finish to what he said. the ayatollah claims he would be safe for that period under the nuclear agreement reached in july. after nuclear negotiations, the zionist regime said they will control, the about iran in the regime said they will not be the worried about iran in the next 25 years. israel didn't say that. the people over here wrote. the ayatollah wrote i am telling you first you will not be around in 25 years and god willing there will be no zionist regime in 25 years. the spirit of jihad will keep you worried every moment. somebody who is on the course of change. somebody when he should give $100 billion to, create a path to nuclear bomb in five years and build a ballistic missile in eight years. this the man who has changed course and you have

when it comes to israel, iran employs invective against israel at every turn. it has already demonstrated both the will and the capability to strike out against the west, and through proxies and cyber attacks at allies like israel and saudi arabia. what this deal won't do is alter iran's behavior. what it will do is give iran an even greater ability to follow through on these threats. so we cannot allow iran to be empowered as a nuclear threshold state with billions of dollars without something, some protection to israel first. without at least demanding the release of american citizens from iran after are years, first. let's at least agree on that. i understand there is strong division in this senate, the majority opposes and the favors on the iranian deal. but the very least, mr. president, the very least we should be able to come together over the vote we take today and so i would urge all my colleagues to vote for it. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. reid: the senate has already spoken, that the agreement with iran

peace for israel, for the region, and for the world. take a back seat to no one in my commitment to the security of israel, a commitment i demonstrated through my 28-plus years in the senate. and as secretary of state i am fully conscious of the exso sen shall nature of the choice israel must make. i understand the conviction that israel even more than any other country simply cannot afford a mistake in defending its security. and while i respectfully disagree with prime minister netenyahu about the benefits of the iran agreement, i do not question for an instant the basis of his concern or that of any israeli, but i am also convinced as is president obama, our senior defense and military leaders, and even many former israeli military and intelligence officials, that this agreement puts us on the right path to prevent iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon. the people of israel will be safer with this deal, and the same is true for the people throughout the region. and to fully ensure that, we are also taking specific and far-reaching

when hamas attacked israel in 2012, i supported israel's right to self-defense.us israel's qualitative, military edge in the region and promptly finalize our new 10-year memorandum of understanding to cement our security assistance commitments. w likewise, we must strengthen our relationships with all of our regional partners. the countrieses of the arabian peninsula require our assistancs to counter threats from iran. i our cooperation in ballistic missile defense and encountering violent extremists through intelligence sharing and interdiction must continue and be enhanced. over the past two months i have consulted with many stakeholders, groups, advocatesd and concerned constituents on both sides of this debate. without exception, their passion is born of an unwavering desire to secure a lasting peace for the middle east, israel, the united states, and the world. and this is a passion that i share. the world has come together in an historic way, with the agreement, we gain much but mosr important, we avoid missing the significant diplomaticppor opportunity to insure that iran never

peace for israel, for the region, and for the world.one ina back seat to no my commitment to the security of israel. the commitment i demonstrated through my 28 plus years in the senate. and the secretary of state, i'm fully conscious of the existential nature of the choice israel must make. the conviction that israel, even more than any other country, simply cannot afford a mistake in defending its security. i respect we disagree with prime minister then yahoo! the benefits of the iran agreement, i do not question for an instant the basis of his concern, or that of any israeli. convinced, as is president obama, our senior defense and military leaders, and even many of former israeli military and intelligence officials, that this agreement puts us on the right path to present -- prevent iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon. the people of israel will be safer with this deal, and the same is true for the people throughout the region. that, we areensure also taking specific and far-reaching steps to coordinate with our friends from the

the state of israel. he, like i, believe that support for the joint company hence of plan of action is not only in america is a security interest, but it is in israel's security interest as well. what is not well-known is that the critical strategic work reidthen-majority leader played from 2009-2012 in ensuring that biting, far-reaching sanctions were enacted, and were done so in a way of that maximized president obama's ability to put together a far-reaching international coalition in support of sanctions. he wasn't the author of these sanctions bill. his name doesn't appear in the newspapers or discussions about him. but he was seized with a critical importance of preventing iran from having a nuclear weapons capability. >> as some of you may know, january 1. as senator mikulski said in the first meeting when i came back to the caucus, i've said it all my life, exercise will kill you. here is the deal. i can't see out of my right eye, but it does let light in. so i got some new glasses and we are going

to contrast that with israel's position.their position in iran, it some takes rational steps geared to achieve the same goals. among them destruction of my country. they are a jihadist cult type regime that is supporting tear and all the things i've talked about. the president has said openly that iran is not north korea. they've said that iran is worse than 50 north korea's. how how big of a gap can you get? the gap widens, starting in november 2013 when it became clear that the united states had been negotiating without telling israel with iran and had been within inches of an agreement that would preserve the infrastructure of all of the centrifuges. they would still be intact. the actual program would be contained. the biggest problem for israel as there was no connection between lifting federal sanctions would had been put in place over the course of a decade without any change in behavior. they didn't have to give up trying to destroy us. >> this was a true problem for us. >> you can watch this and other programs on tv

martin: israel. you made a very clear effort in your speech to say it's time for healing, it's time to come together. when you're president that you would have the prime minister there in your first month. and that's very consistent, as i think you said in your speech, with your approach which has always been to put your arm around prime minister netanyahu rather than -- secretary clinton: or any prime minister. [laughter] martin: and as you know, that's a policy that i support too, but some of my friends in israel recently have said that's not the way to deal with us. we need tough love, which is the alternative. instead of rewarding bad behavior, you should be really speaking tough -- more toughly to us. well how do you respond to that? , secretary clinton: well, i think there is a lot of room for tough love, particularly in private and behind, you know, closed doors. as i write in my book, certainly prime minister netanyahu and i had very vigorous conversations that have gone on in person and over

to israel security. and they believe this deal will make israel safer. it doesn't change the fact the israeli government opposes this. i agree with that. i understand that. but there is a split in israel and it is worth commenting on it. with their expertise and knowledge their endorsements should be taken seriously. and also the endorsements from our current and former colleagues in congress should be taken seriously. 11 jewish former members have weighed in saying -- quote -- "we champion the u.s.-israel alliance and all strongly support this agreement because it will enhance the security of the united states, the state of israel, and the entire world." i thank them for weighing in. this is one of those debates that's very hard regardless of your position because it's emotional, it's difficult. and yet they weighed in, as did the israeli security experts. blee me, the pressure on -- believe me, the pressure on them not to talk was enormous. this deal also has the support of some of the most knowledgeab

not israel. why the jewish state says no. >> i'm calling congress - take a cue from the rest of the world >>> the president takes action to help workers in honour of labour day. and sibling rivalry, serena williams and venus williams to face off for the 27th time >>> and we begin with efforts to deal with massive numbers of refugees who are seeking new lives in europe. international organization for migration says more than 300,000 refugees arrived this year, 1500 every day. germany and france say they are willing to take 80,000, britain 20,000, but only from camps in the middle east. hungary's defence minister quit as tens of thousands of refugees try to enter that country, tensions boiling over on the border with serbia as people tried to break through the police lines. andrew simmonds is at the border. >> reporter: this person is following in the weary footsteps of thousands, coming across the border from serbia into hungary. there'll be another exodus into germany and austria may not happen.

and the fact that israel is a really small country.ne day are going to return to society. and the prisons don't want to release hardened, angry prisoners out there. because they will have to live with each other. they will have to live within the small israeli society. >> translator: we treat the prisoners in a respectful manner. we treat them as human beings. >> and nowhere is that respect and trust better demonstrated than in the staff cafeteria. corrections officers eat here every day and the food is all prepared by inmates. >> the officers were not at all concerned about the inmates tampering with their food. not a single officer expressed fear. they had complete trust. and they even were complimentary of the food. >> inmates also cook the three daily meals provided to other inmates. but most rimonim inmates, including wadia abu amar, cook for themselves with the food they purchase from the canteen in kitchens located in each housing unit and in some cases inside individual cells. >> translator: the food is reasonable. let's put it

-israel relationship. we must reinvigorate the bipartisan consensus which has been the foundation of america's relationship with israel. and we must ensure that israel is able to maintain its qualitative military edge and its ability to defend itself. the world is watching us this week. the united states is being looked to. not for rhetoric and outrage, but for leadership and resolve. so let's present our arguments and cast our votes. then let's work together to move forward in a productive way. i appreciate how we've worked together on the foreign affairs committee, with chairman royce. i thank you, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. royce. mr. royce: mr. speaker, i appreciate the bipartisan relationship that all of the members on the foreign affairs committee have. but especially today. the words of mr. engel, that every member of this house should be mindful, that

israel is iran's number one target. while the administration says it's doing everything possible to help protect israel, the budgetary record tells a different story. and mr. shooer you talked about this when you did your opening statement. i have two charts. could i get those up on the screen for everybody to see? and then we have handouts as well. can we get those up on the screen? i was told we could get those up. is that a no, joy? okay. well, the chart's in front of you illustrate the administration's requested funding for israeli missile defense versus actual congressional appropriations. congress consistently appropriates funding much closer to israeli requirements. the first chart covers funding for all israeli missile defense programs. the president requested approximately $158 million for israeli missile defense in the fy-16 budget request, the house and senate defense appropriations bills both would appropriate israeli missile defense at over $338 million. so it's a comparison of $158 million to $338 million,

and then when israel -- you all remember israel, right?ou remember in israel, when they there in israel had said never again, they've meant it. here in america, not always the case. in israel, they would have to defend themselves. even if it meant annihilation of israel, which it wouldn't, god would protect them, but even if it did, they would not go down quietly as they did during world war ii. they were going to make an attack. they would have to, on iran's nuclear build-up. and under the iran deal, since we would have entered that with iran through this president, and because the house would have not had the nerve to stop it, then the unthinkable would have happened, what you and i have never dreamed would be possible in our lifetime, we would stand with all of the anti-semites in the world and condemned israel and been an enemy to israel. we cannot let that happen. and the good news is the vote that was scheduled at 1:30 to run through the scenario i laid out has been stopped. [ cheering and applause ] congratulations, you are making a

israel continuously violates them. we therefore declare we cannot continue to be bound about these signed agreements with israel. >> let's take you live to ramallah, and at first glance it sounded like president abbas was saying that's it. the oslo accord is completely over. israel must now assume its responsibilities as the occupying power. but when you study his speech in-depth, it is not that simple, is it? >> it certainly isn't. what president abbas said, until israel meets the conditions of the oslo accord, then palestine is not bound by it. there is wiggle room there. and if we want to use history as a yardstick, if you will, to measure just what mr. abbas may do next, we only need to look at the fact that the palestinians showing the international criminal court on decembe december 31st last year signing the rome statute. it took mr. abbas two years when he first started talking about it in 2013 to when he signed it. when you look at how there were no repercussions to him as president, no threat to the palestini

security assistance to israel. we can enhance support for areas like missile defense, information sharing, interdiction -- all to help meet israel's pressing security needs, and to provide a hedge against any additional activities that iran may engage in as a consequence of sanctions relief. but i have also listened to the israeli security establishment, which warned of the danger posed by a nuclear-armed iran for decades. in fact, they helped develop many of the ideas that ultimately led to this deal. so, to friends of israel, and to the israeli people, i say this, a nuclear-armed iran is far more dangerous to israel, to america, and to the world than an iran that benefits from sanctions relief. i recognize that prime minister netanyahu disagrees -- disagrees strongly. i do not doubt his sincerity. but i believe he is wrong. i believe the facts support this deal. i believe they are in america's interest and israel's interest. and as president of the united states, it would be an abrogation of my constitutional dut

to israel. to oppose this agreement is, whether intended or not, to recommend national paralysis. it is to take us back directly to the varied dangerous spot we were in only to go back there, devoid of any realistic plan or option. by contrast, the adoption and implementation of this agreement will cement the support of the international community behind the plan to ensure iran does not ever require or possess a nuclear weapon. in doing so, it removes a looming threafrom a fragile region and discourage others from trying to develop nuclear arms and make our citizens and allies safer and reassure the world the hardest problems can be addressed successfully by diplomatic needs. best, american foreign-policy, the policy of the united states combined immense power and clarity of purpose, relying on reason and persuasion whenever possible as has been demonstrated many times. our country does not shy from the necessary use of force our hope and values push us to explore every avenue for peace. the ira

it wants to destroy israel. it wants to destroy america. listen to their own words, and if you do, we would say we want peace but it will be on our terms from a position of strength. vote no on this deal. nd i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from. mr. levin: i yield to another member of our committee, mr. crowley of new york. mr. crowley: i like mike, i admire him but i think he is it a disservice to the house and this debate to bring up the issue of 9/11. i do thank him for his honesty to say this is all about, having this debate today and this vote today to stir the emotions of the american people. my emotions always start on this day. 14 years ago i knew people who died that day. my cousin died. my friends died. i don't need to be reminded of that but it will not cloud my decisionmaking on this important issue. today i stand in support of a joint comprehensive plan of action. this has been a difficult decision for me and i know it's been for many of my colleagues as well. there are those who came out against this deal

they don't want israel to survive, they will not let israel survive with incompetent leadership likehave now, israel will not survive. and then come out with nasty statements that israel will not be be around in 25 years and we have no dealings or further dealings with the united states. now, the people we were negotiating with and working on the sanctions with. including and as an example russia who is selling missiles to iran. you know that. ballistic missiles sold to iran. all of these countries are going to do business with iran, and they are going to make lots of money and other things with iran and we are going to do, get nothing. nothing. we are led by led boy stupid people. very, very stupid people. we cannot let it continue. we are a country that owes $19 trillion. we lose everywhere. we lose militarily. we can't beat isis. give me a break. we can't beat anybody. our vets are treated horribly. it will change. we will have so much winning if i get elected that you may get bored with winning. believe be me. i agree. you will never get bored with win withing. we never get bored

this would be unacceptable in israel. but the government could not be extorted in the way it has been in reason years by the terrorist organizations that confront us. because they know there's no limit on the numbers. i should say here, we were asked and we paid a price, also, for some idea on the medical condition of a kidnapped soldier. if he's alive or dead. we were asked to pay for corpse, for dead soldiers, for remains of corpses. there's no limit to the cynical views of this kind of extortion. people did feel this is a slippery slope. i won't relate to ongoing cases, naturally, but i would say this was a serious attempt to lay down rules. other attempts that were more public was in some legislation that was introduced. it also limits the authorities before that it was the president's authority to pardon prisoners that were sentenced for life. that would be most of the terrorists that murdered people. but, also, some other heinous terrorists. it's not just about terrorists, it's about murderers of this kind at large.

a warning to israel that the palestinians would no longer be bound to the oslo accords so long as israel does not fulfill its side of those agreements. something that mr. abbas says israel has consistently failed to do for the past several years. what does this mean on the ground? at this stage we don't know. there is ambiguity here. does it mean that we'll see the end of cooperation between israel and the palestinians, something that mr. abbas once described as sacred. will we see an end to the palestinian authority? we just don't know at this stage. but the message is clear to the israelis. mr. abbas is looking for a way forward. he's attuned to the anger on the street here in the occupied territories, in the occupied west bank in which a recent poll found more than two-thirds of palestinians want mr. abbas to step down and want a new leadership to move forward. so he finds himself in a very tricky situation that's why perhaps we're hearing these strong comments. but what it will mean practically, we just don't know at this stage. >> india has sentenced five men to death for the 2006 m

to wipe israel off the map. let them say what they want about the purportedly about modern rouhani, but it's in the history. a man has been in jail since july 14, iran continues to hold him since trumped-up charges. and he's not alone. iran also holds an american pastor, a u.s. marine who traveled to iran to visit family members. and it's believed to hold robert levinson, who was kidnapped from an island off of iran's coast. it continues. iran continues to persecute christians and baha'is in its own country. flagrant human rights violations this does not suggest to me that this is a regime that is ready for reform. this is not in historical context, this is here, this is now, these persecutions, these human rights violations, these -- these imprisonments are right here, right now. and if this were not enough to cause one to question whether we can trust iran to change its ways, consider this -- iran is a key funder of hamas and hezbollah, committed, committed to the destruction of the state of israel, it funds t

we are dangerous to us, israel, continuing to advance our military dangerous to us, israel, capabilities that provide all options as the president has directed should iran walk away from its commitments under this deal. last week i was in the middle east and i had an opportunity to visit with some of our men and women in uniform who are carrying out this strategy. i know how much all of you care for them and like me, you're proud of their impressive work. i will tell you this morning when i told them. we are continuing full speed ahead standing with our friends, standing up to isolate, and standing against iran's malign activity. on isil, as i testified earlier, we have the right strategy in place built on nine synchronized lines of effort to achieve i sold's lasting defeat. we continue to strengthen execution. today in iraq and other places where working with partners on the ground and the global coalition to enable ground forces to win back iraq sovereignty and peace on its own territory. i saw several parts of that effort last week and spoke with some of our partners on the ground. we

we are better off israel having nuclear weapons. israel is not weak. and that kind of argument doesn't consist with the facts. i don't want to fight the iraq war over again. but i do remember what the late saudi foreign minister said, he said the bush administration handed iraq to iran on a silver platter. i think that's the sin of letting the iranians getting into iraq occurred. i agree with you. the obama administration just helped them come in further. if we are going to debate the errors, we will have never have time to talk about the iran nuclear deal. major: arms control can not only be evaluated in its own terms but needs to be assessed in terms of larger considerations. leon: since the president's first inaugural address, since his first public pronouncement as president that he has dreamed for good reasons or bad, that he has dreamed of a new relationship with iran. in 2009 -- my own view is many people want a new relationship with iran, suffer from this feeling that the united states comes to iran with some sort of prior disqualifying guilt f