that that would be a destabilizing situation that would be a profound threat to not only the united states security, but the world security. north korea also has a track record of collaboration that makes it unacceptable for them to be accepted as a nuclear power. they have not shown in the past any restraint in terms of exporting weapons to not only state actors, but also nonstate actors. so what we said is that there is a path for north korea to take. in which they are joining the world to community, becoming integrated in the world economy, able to feed their own people, able to provide prosperity for their people. i know that the republic of korea welcomes that kind of neighbor. and the essay there is a strong escort bond between the korean people's, that should be affirmed. but in order to take that path, north korea has to make a decision, and understand that prestige and security and prosperity are not going to come through the path of threatening neighbors and engaging in violations of international law. >> right now, north korea, there was a question about whether we fear an imminent attac

making that decision, it is correctly confident that no matter what threats there are two new united states securities, we will not interfere with ships coming into our ports. china can have the u.s. markets and a policy towards north korea. the reason i rank iran first is because the regime is ambitious. north korea's objective is to just dominate people. my concern is they will build tend bombs for themselves and put the 11th on ebay. but as long as the regime survives within its borders, i do not think they will take aggressive action. iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism. so you would expect an emboldened iran would be tearing on terrorism with impunity. that puts us eyeball to eyeball with a hostile power. host: sutherland, nebraska. margaret. hello. you are on. caller: i have been worried for a long time about u.s.-china relations and our trade policies about china. i believe the u.s. is too involved with china and it is still and probably always will be a communist country. why are we still doing so much shade -- trade with china? they have so much interest, and they are not for th

iran has defied the united states, the u.n. security council, the iaea and continues its quest for nuclear technology. . it would pose a grave danger to the united states. focusing on iran should be a top priority of the united states congress and every minute we wait to address this issue, the world becomes a more dangerous place. the state department has not had an authorization bill since fiscal year 2003 and has continued to operate and while the authorization is important, stopping iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is far more important. the republican motion to recommit would replace the authorization bill with the iran refined petroleum sanctions bill that mr. berman introduced earlier this year, along with congresswoman ros-lehtinen. this bill would impose badly needed sanctions on iran. we feel that this bill is the right way to proceed and should be acted on immediately. the legislation currently has 155 co-sponsors, with wide bipartisan support. this legislation would mandate the state department to open immediate investig

interest of the united states -- a top national security interest of the united states. in essence, numbers marry. we can't just reduce the numbers of our weapons to some arbitrary limit like 1,500 or 1,000. we must have a nuclear arsenal sufficient to cover both the united states and the allies who rely on us. and that number cannot be determined without significant study. if we don't, our allies could conclude they need to develop their own nuclear weapon. the commission also recognized that specific platforms matter. that's why the commission stated that the triad, the submarines, bombers and icbm's must be retained as well as other delivery systems such as our nuclear-capable kriewsm cruise s which are important in certain areas of the world. it is my home the administration will take the findings and recommendations seriously. we owe the commissioners a debt of gratitude for their service. the best way to show gratitude is by listening to them and charting our course based on where they revealed consensus is possible. finally, mr. pres

security. i am glad that the prime minister netanyahu made the speech. united states will continue to be as honest as possible to all sides in this dispute. it is in everybody's interest to move in a new direction. i think it can be accomplished. it will require a lot of work and a partnership with key countries like italy to help parties come together. >> [speaking italian] [inaudible] -- [unintelligible] >> you discussed during the meeting the economic crisis. the measures you are discussing right now, will this be discussed at the next g-8 in g- 20 meeting? >> our respective prime ministers have been meeting diligently. they have put forward a framework that will be discussed and hopefully ratified at the g-8 meeting. that will provide a broad consensus. the united states is putting forth a very specific regulatory reform that will make sure that we do not find ourselves in this position again. it improves oversight, ensures that banks are not taking risks with highly leveraged money that can result in systemic collapse , and that consumers and investors are protec

balance the need to protect openness, privacy, and economic vitality on one hand and security on the other? does the united states have a secure and reliable access to the critical metals and materials that make up the information network and hardware? i have to give a shout out to a brand new program on national security on these issues. to what extent and with international partners in protecting cyber security, how shall we engage with these partners that do not share our views about censorship, privacy, and oversight? how should the united states respond to cyber attacks, whether from individuals, transnational criminal or terrorist networks or foreign governments? for an organization like us, we are concerned with at what point should the u.s. respond to cyber attacks with force? what conditions would be added conditions use cyber attacks defensively? these are complicated questions and i have no doubt the panel will help address them today. thank you very much. [applause] thank you for each of you for coming out. i focus on cyber security issues, energy issues and a couple of other things. we are so excited

the united states will never do anything to undermine i's security, and the united states also supports a viable palestinian state. we do not believe that these two objectives are incompatible. in fact, we believe that they are both critical elements of a comprehensive and secure peace. mr. lieberman, i hope that you enjoy your first visit to the united states as your country's foreign minister and i look forward to continuing our conversation and working with you on these issues more in the future. >> mad secretary, i would like to say to you the people as a government of israel appreciate your consistent support of israel. very value your friendship greatly. we roecognize the many contributions you made personally even before you were a senator from new york. we thank you for your longstanding commitment to israel and strengthening the america american-israeli special relationship and friendship. i think that we have had a good discussion today covering a broad spectrum of regional and global issues. we also covered a wide range of important bilateral topics. mad secretary, i thank yo

latest activities, now makes it absolutely necessary for the united states to strengthen our alliance and partnership with the south korea, the security alliance between the united states and korea has been pivotal after since it was forged through much shedding of blood during the korean war some 60 years ago. as i recall over 33,000 of our men and women in military uniform died as a result of that terrible conflict known as the korean war. without question south korea has remained a steadfast u.s. ally, especially in our time of need, whether it be the horrific conflict of vietnam or where i personally served at the time with some 50,000 south korean soldiers were right there fighting alongside the members of our forces there at that time. when we needed assistance in iraq, afghanistan, lebanon, and other global hot spots, south korea responded affirmatively and dependably as our ally. the foundation of our friendship and alliance is unshakable. through our shared values and common history, we are able to meet global challenges together ranging from terrorism to the current crisis in north korea. mr. speaker, our economic and trade

united states. and we achieve this triple play . we can simultaneously create jobs by propelling these new technologies with the alternative energies and fuels of the future. we can improve the national security of the united states by breaking the addiction to oil. that will only come when the economics work out for the competing technologies. currently the incumbent technology, gasoline in the case of transportation fuel, has this -- these negative externals -- externalities that aren't recognized. if they were and attached to that product, the environmental problems that it causes, the small paragraph particular lats -- particulates, they are quantifiable and real, you attached that to that product, suddenly the marketplace could deliver competing technologies. and the fuels of the future could take off and could lead us to these jobs of the future and to cleaning up the air. madam speaker, this is a fabulous opportunity. it starts with stopping the current cap and trade proposal. and then we come together, republicans, democrats to find a better solution. i think we can find it in a revenue neutral tax swap that makes free enterprise able to lead us into the fuels of the future. madam spe

including undersecretary of state for management, assistant secretary of defense in the second secretary for the national security council. colonel green is retired from the united states army and served on the commission as an acting coach year. yields a bachelor of arts from the university of arkansas and an m.s. from george washington university. thank you for making yourself available to testify in the work you are doing for the commission as wells

desire for systems this demonstrates their commitments to regional security and upper ability with each other and with the united states. air -- the maritime security has been eight -- become a salient issue. as with terrorism, piracy is a problem that has serious implications. it should be of particular concern of any nation that depends on the seas for their commerce. last year, combined maritime forces base in bahrain established a security patrol to keep shipping lanes safe. i encourage you to participate in this important mission. given the vast coastal areas that we are talking about, more than 1 million square miles, there are limits to patrolling alone. more must be done. members of the international community must work together to pursue an detour piracy under the security council resolution passed late last year. companies and ships must be more vigilant about staying in traffic corridors and should consider about increasing their security personnel. gulf nations

the united states national security department allowed their program oversight staff and expertise to dwindle to the point in many circumstances contractors have been hired to oversee other contractors work. report after report had identified the key need to rebuild branch oversight capacity but as yet we have seen little to show for it. we need to fix a broken contract and oversight function in the executive branch and add to it a oversight from independent sources of congress. that was the product of efforts by several of us in congress dating back to 2005. at that time it became clear to us we needed an entity that could provide sustained over the side of wartime contracts similar to the efforts of the truman committee during the 1940's. waste fraud and abuse in wartime contracts transcends politics. oversight should not be the luxury of the divided government and languish when congressional majorities in the president share a common political party. wiesel the disasters as we initiated in prosecuted action in iraq. i have by expectations for the contract thing can accomplish and w

united states of america and to her. and this issue is unanswered and unspoken to? and the security of the united states of america is hinged upon our ability to have a working and trusting relationship to fund the c.i.a. and the 14 other members of the intelligence community and our department of defense, i might add, and our domestic law enforcement, i might add. well, now, if there is no relationship between the speaker of the house and the intelligence community other than one of directly at odds against each other with the speaker declaring the c.i.a. up here in the secured room in the capitol to be lying to the person who is third in line to the presidency, the speaker of the house of representatives, said yes, they lied to me. they did it all the time. and they misled the congress of the united states of america. that's the statement. now i retracted, no evidence given, just an allege. now when someone accuses someone else of lying outside these doors in the street, at the family, in the workplace, in private society, they had better have the evidence before they accuse someb

speaker, the united states has an enormous stake in the security and stability of pakistan. we can't allow al qaeda or any other terrorist group that threaten ours national security to operate with impunity in the tribal regions or any other part of pakistan. nor can we permit toe the pakistani state and its nuclear arsenal to be taken over by the taliban. to help prevent this nightmare scenario, we need to forge a true strategic partnership with pakistan and its people, strengthen pakistan's democratic government, and work to make pakistan a source of stability in a volatile region. h.r. 1886 is designed to help achieve these critical goals. this legislation would significantly expand democratic, economic, and social development assistance to help lay the foundation for a stronger, more stable pakistan. the bill provides funding to strengthen the capacity of pakistan's democratic institutions, including its parliament, judicial system, and law enforcement agencies. it calls for increased assistance for pakistan's public education system, emphasis on access for women and gir

arms and light weapons in a manner that furthers the foreign policy and national security interests of the united states in the western hemisphere. while this task force is comprised of the secretaries of state and homeland security, the attorney general, all of whom should be members of this task force, it does not include perhaps the most important player in global countertrafficking operations, the secretary of defense. the department of defense plays an important role in u.s. security cooperation and assistance worldwide, particularly with the governments and militaries throughout the western hemisphere. these relationships are critical to our efforts to promote peace and stability in our region of the world and intelligence and operational support provided by our military are an integral part of this shared responsibility. given the d.o.d.'s role and interagency partner in countertrafficking and u.s. export control activities it should not be without this task force. whatever this task force puts forward in the way of policy recommendations will be closely evaluated by congress as we work to addres

chiefs of staff have come to the conclusion that it's in the best interests of the united states' safety and security that one of these notorious terrorists be brought to the united states for trial. and so it has been announced today that mr. ahmaz ghalani is being brought to the united states, to new york, for trial. luckily this administration is not following the advice and counsel of senator mcconnell and some on his side. it is time for this man to face a trial. what is he being charged with? he's being charged as one of those involved in the 1998 embassy attacks in africa. this tanzania national has been held in cuba since september of 2006. he was captured by our forces, and others, in pakistan, in 2004 and transported to guantanamo. he is being charged with his involvement in the 1998 bombings of u.s. embassies in east africa which killed 224 people, including 12 americans. the position being taken by the republicans in the senate is that this man should not be brought to the united states for trial. i think they're wrong. i think it's time that he answer for the crimes that are being charge

[applause] lastly, the issue of energy is critical, not only to the economic security of the united states, but our national security as well. i do not know about you, but in looking at who we buy a lot of oil from, they are not exactly our friends. hugo job as from venezuela -- chavez, ahmadinejad, they are not exactly friends to the united states. we should be independent of foreign sources of energy in the united states. we have the energy. if we have the will, we can do it, and we can do it together. [applause] this is an issue that you do not hear republicans talk a lot about. i believe it is an issue we can actually take from the democrats. it is the issue of education. it has been said that education is the new civil right in america. i believe that. to compete in the 21st century, our kids need the best schools that they can go to. they already have it in our colleges and universities. we have the finest colleges and universities anywhere in the world. people all over the world want to come to america to go to our colleges and universities. we have arguably the second worst k-12 sy

security challenges. we should be prepared to adapt the architecture of international as additions to revive their new responsibilities. is there anything specific in mind that the united states support expansion of security council for instance? >> we are engaged now in a review on the broad issue of human security council reform which includes the thorny issue of new permanent members and things like that, so i don't have any news for you on that yet, but in general as the secretary said we do believe that international institutions as a group should reflect the new wage in the new importance of countries like india. >> malcolm brown and i ask this on behalf of times out of india. the you were basically a broadly on the same page but there were some areas of potential difference. on the security front for instance there is a concern evidently that some of the support being provided to pakistan is not directly targeting the insurgency and has capabilities and other directions. in all so it seems washington is in a position to apply greater leverage in pakistan to address the mumbai attacks and other terrorist concerns that india has. at what is your take on those points? >>

nuclear power [applause] lastly, the issue of energy is critical not only to the economic security of the united statesut the national security as well. i don't know about you but looking who read by a lot of oil from they are not exactly our friends. hugo chavez from venezuela, ahmadinejad come as some of these other folks that have oil in the world are not exactly necessarily friendly to the united states. the bottom line is we should be independent of foreign sources of energy in the united states. we have the energy if we have the will, but we can do it and we can do it together [applause] this is the issue you don't hear republicans talk a lot about and i don't know why it is an issue i think we can take from the democrats come with the issue of education. has been said education is the new civil rights because to compete in the 21st century they need the best schools, the absolute best schools they can go to. by the way they already haven't in colleges and universities anywhere in the world. people all over the world want to come to america to go to college and university. we have arguably the se

my position coming into this office has been that the united states has coronation security interests in making sure iran doesn't possess a nuclear weapon and stops exporting terrorism out of its borders. we have provided a path whereby iran can reach out to the international community, engage and become a part of international norms. it is up to them to make a decision as to whether they choose that path. what we've been seeing over the last several days, the last couple of weeks, obviously is not encouraging in terms of the path that this regime may choose to take. and the fact that they are now in the midst of an extraordinary debate taking place in iran may end up coloring how they respond to the international community as a whole. we are going to monitor and see how this plays itself out before we make any judgments about how we proceed. but just to reiterate, there is a path available to iran in which their sovereignty is respected, their traditions, their culture, their faith is respected but one in which they are part of a larger community that has responsibilities and operate

supported by 2/3 of the united states senate, the president of the united states when he met at the g-20. he pledged that we would play our part in trying to bring the security that this country has paid so dearly to achieve. our share is approximately 20%. the other members of the g-20 will be putting up 80%. why? because they, too believe it advances the security of their countries. they also believe it lifts up the poorest nations of the world. not iran, which hasn't got any money since 1984. not hezbollah. no discussions with them. the united states would clear the way and -- would clearly weigh in to stop such funding. with a bill that seeks security and peace. i suggest to you that it is my belief that if it were a republican president asking for this, this bill would pass with some 368 votes again. why? because democrats would join in the republican president as we have in the past and say this is for america's security. for international security. this bill does some other things. we have a pandemic flew. -- flu that is now level that the world health organization says is 41 years historically in the context. the administration has said because of th

things in the senate -- on the senate floor which i don't think are consistent with the security of the united states. senator mcconnell, the distinguished minority leader, and senator kyl, the distinguished assistant minority leader, have argued that we should not transfer suspected terrorists from guantanamo to the united states in order to bring them to justice. they have argued that we cannot safely hold any of these detainees in prison in the united states even, one of their arguments, during the course of a trial. when you look at the failed track record of prosecuting terrorists at guantanamo, it's pretty clear. if ahmed ghalani isn't prosecuted in the u.s. courts, there's a good chance he'll never be punished for his crimes. president obama's made it clear. he said -- and i quote -- "preventing this detainee from coming to our shores would prevent his trial and convicti conviction, and after over a decade, it is time to finally see that justice is served and that is what we intend to do." now, even senator kyl appears to have softened his position. on the floor of the senate yesterday, he spo

violent attack on the united states holocaust memorial museum on june 10, 2009 and honoring the bravery and dedication of the united states holocaust museum employees and security personnel. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall and the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia. but the gentleman will suspend while we get order. the gentleman from west virginia is recognized. mr. rahall: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration. wasmede. mr. rahall: this resolution places this body on record condemning yesterday's violent attack on the united states holocaust museum, while praising the bravery and sacrifice against those who defended against this attack. it recognizes the vital role that the museum plays in the world and redead indicates this congress to assisting wherever possible in helping the museum to continue to accomplish its mission of education and enlightenment. first and fo

in 1990 and 2008 believed that the imf itself was an important aspect in the seeking of security by the united statesof america. we did not put it in that bill. it is supported by two-thirds of the indicted states senate and the president of the united states who when he met with the g-20 plant to play our part in trying to bring the security of this country has paid so dearly to achieve. our share is approximately 20%. the other members of the g-20 will be putting up 80%. they believe this is enhancing the security of their country's. what it does is to lift up the poorest nations of the world. not iran -- the last time they got money from the imf was when ronald reagan was president. not hezbollah. no discussions with them. the u.s. would weigh in to stop such funding. we have a bill that seeks security and it has te they prongs. -- two prongs. if it were a republican president asking for this, it would pass with over 300 votes again. democrats would join to the republican president's request as we have done in the past to say this is for america's security or international security, and we support

united states armed forces. this legislation acknowledges that the united states has a vital national security interest in ensuring that afghanistan does not once again become a safe haven for terrorists, supports a comprehensive counterinsurgency strategy that is adequately resourced and funded by congress and calls on the president to provide our u.s. military commanders with the military forces they require in order to succeed. in iraq, the committee ensures that congress will support the president's plan to redeploy combat forces while providing our commanders on the ground the flexibility to hold hard fought security gains and ensure the safety of our forces. mr. chairman, we owe our soldiers, sailors airmen and marines the best available equipment, training and support in order to provide them with the best possible tools to undertake their missions and return safely. the provisions that are already in this bill go a considerable way in demonstrating this support, but we can and should improve it. congress and particularly the armed services committees in both chambers have the obligation to ensure that the

supported by 2/3 of the united states senate, supported by the president of the united states who when he met with the g-20 pledged to play our part in trying to bring the security that this country so -- has paid so dearly to achieve. our shares is approximately 20% . the other members of the g-20, 19 nations will be putting up 80%. why? because they too believe this is enhancing the security of their countries and also what they think it does is to lift up the poorest nations of the world. not iran, who's not gotten any money since 1994. not hezbollah. no discussions with them. the united states would clearly weigh in to stop such funding, properly so. so we have a bill that seeks security and peace and it's two-prong now, not one. and i suggest to you that it is my belief that if it were a republican president asking for this that this bill would pass with some 368 votes again. why? because democrats would join in the republican president's request as we have in the past and say this is for america's security, for international security, and we'll support it. now, this bill does some other things. we have a pandemic flu, swine flu, h-1-n-1 flu that is now at

treaty, normalization, economic and energy assistance, a negative security assurance in the 2005 joint statement which says that the united states will not attack north korea with nuclear conventional weapons. if security was driving their need for nuclear weapons, the negative security assurance and everything that came with the political and material incentives should at least offer them enough of an incentive to push harder forward on the process, yet, in our negotiations, they continue to falter when we got to the most crucial moments. >> thank you. >> if i might, senator, without taking issue at all with port inspections and other things, i think we really have to keep our eye on the plutonium. the north has a likely response, nothing certain about the north, to what's going on right now which is to restart the reactor at yongbyon which would generate more plutonium. i think we have to try to prevent that from happening. i don't know a better way than negotiation. i think we can't risk a war here. we have sold as a hostage. if you keep your eye on plutonium, right now they had a limited supply and limited enough to have ano

authorization act, which the royce amendment would designate eritrea the state sponsor of terrorism and call on the united nations security council to impose sanctions against eritrea i strongly oppose. while i certainly respect my esteemed colleague from california, ed royce, who served as an excellent chairman of the subcommittee on africa for several years and we worked closely together on many issues and i have a great deal of

security issue, mr. speaker, of the speaker of the house declaring the c.i.a. to be a group of if lone yuss liars and having lied to congress, the united states of america and then stated that she's going up to receive briefings after this. the united states of america's national security has to be at risk when the third person in line for the presidency declare ours intelligence community to be lying to congress. decisions get made, on this floor, in committee, behind the scenes, sometimes by staff, based on the allegations made by the speaker, the staff wants to please the speaker, the speaker is ducking the issue. we need to have a vote. i offered an amendment to get a vote on the c.i.a. we aren't going to get that vote because the rules committee shut it down. i offered an amendment that would also clean up some of this, amendment number two, increases and decreases standing committee by $1 million so we can broad cags the activities in the rules committee. when you go into a committee and realize you're sitting in front of a camera, it causes people to have a better demiddle eastern. some of it ends up on youtube. the rules committee doesn't have that. the

my position coming into this office has been that the united states has poured national security interests in making sure that i run does not possess a nuclear weapon and that it does not support terrorism outside of its borders. we provided a task whereby iran can reach out to the international community, in gauge, and become a part of the international community. it is up to them if they choose that path. what we have been seen over the last several days and last several weeks is not encourage that. the fact that they are in the midst of an extraordinary debate taking place in iran, may end up coloring how they respond to the international community as a whole. we are going to monitor and see how this plays itself out before we make any judgments about how we proceed. to reiterate, there is a patch available to iran where their sovereignty is respected, the traditions, culture, fate is respected, but one option which they are part of a larger community that has responsibilities. it operates according to international rules that are universal. we do not know how they're going to respond t

yesterday as chairman of the united states commission on security and cooperation in europe, the helsinki commission, i was privileged to join secretary of state clinton at the state department for the official release of the ninth annual trafficking in persons report. this is a vital diplomatic tool. it's put out every year by the united states, been doing this for almost 10 years now. and it lists every country, and the current status of trafficking in their country. some countries are origin countries. others allow trafficking through their countries. other countries are receiving countries. in this report there is an -- and this report is an objective yardstick so we know exactly what is happening in each one of these countries much it is a valuable tool for us to put an end to the trafficking in human beings used for forced labor or sex or for other illegal-type purposes. it was interesting, mr. president, that the secretary of state, secretary clinton, also released the attorney general's report to congress, "an assessment of u.s. government activities to combat trafficking in perso

obviously concerned about destabilization. >> first, it would be unwise for the united states or other members of the securityncil to fail to take strong action in response to a very provocative and illegal action on the part of north korea. out of concern that they may take strong action. the point is that we needed to demonstrate, and today we have demonstrated, that provocative, reckless actions come at a cost

this committee said recently, quote, the idea that we cannot find a place to securely house 250 detainees in the united states is not rational. we spend billions of dollars on high security facilities. we can do that. and key questions remain for military commissions that are being discussed by the administration. and carry with them the use of abuse. and i ask that you address these commissions the same of law and values. and the same that you and the president have shown so far. another era, we have to come together is a sadly resurgent problem of hate crimes. last week's tragic events at the holocaust museum, is that violence motivated by hatred remains a serious problem, and world consequences. senator kennedy and bipartisans across the political spectrum, once again introduced a bill to take a stand in our enforcement of hate violence. it's to do in the first amendment, and only those who engage in brutal acts of violence will be culpable. and it's time to act, and i know you have supported this and the president has. you have made important steps to ensure a more open, transparent government. you have i

countries into the nato alliance that could only be called protectors, they don't add to the security of the united states to have them as members of the nato. we add to their security. all we have to do as look at what happed in georgia last year. and contemplate what that would have looked like if they would have been a nato member to understand the implications of that. there is not time for a full discussion of that but that is on my radar screen and i look further -- and i look forward to discussing that with you. you said you would agree that our goal in terms of increasing the afghan national army would be higher than what is now proposed, is that correct? >> sir, i believe it when it would. >> would you agree with senator lieberman approach? >> i believe we have to look at it. there is significant growth that is going to be required. >> can you tell me the largest national army that the afghans had ever had? the numbers i have seen were approximately 80,000 to to 90,000 with soviet backing in only were -- we are talking about more than doubling what they had been able to do at any time in the past

that could damage the national security of the united states. 2. pakistan and mexico. that was determined a couple months ago because we did nothing. we have a wide open border. if the drug can tell -- job cartel takes over the refugees will come pouring into the country more than they are now. we cannot control our own border. how is it that all those drugs and drug cartels got organized more and more powerful? because they had easy access to the biggest drug market in the world, easy access. if we had a secure border all these years the access would not have been so easy and maybe we wouldn't have such an enormous mess on our southern border. afraid to do anything, do anything. take the issue of life, our party claims to be pro-life. we have individuals in congress, who are there because of the work and diligence of pro-life activists, because they have told them i will be there for the unborn. i will be a champion of the unborn. i am your candidate. the core of our party is socially conservative. that is where our strength is. they have always been there for those c

s canine teams are important and effective tools for securing all modes of transportation in the united states. the use of canine teams has managed what few security measures can boast. they are well liked. our committee worked hard to re-affirm our support for canine teams in explosion detection. i'm proud to have led these efforts. this amendment rounds out these important provisions as we speak, t.s.a. continues its work meeting the 100% cargo screening requirement established by the 9/11 act. let me indicate that i'm very proud of the language we have about 100% cargo screening. it is one that we worked with the department of homeland security. we worked with mr. markey. we worked with our chairman and our ranking member of both committees, the subcommittee and full committee. we want 100% screening. the canine teams that will be deployed will ensure t.s.a.'s success. mr. hastings, mr. rogers and i have offered what i perceive to be a thoughtful amendment. and i urge my colleagues to support it. i thank mr. hastings and mr. rogers for their collaboration. with that, i'm going to yield beco

it's time for the president of the united states to stand up to the left wing of his party for the good of the national security of this nation. so, madam president, i join others that if -- if that supplemental comes over without the provision, which was adopted unanimously by the united states senate to make sure that those photos are not released, because of the harm it would do to america's effort in combating radical islamic extremists throughout the world and put the lives of the men and women serving in the military in greater danger. so i intend to join my friend, senator lieberman and senator graham, in doing everything that we can to oppose such legislation. this war

believe him when he said that the notion of not buying 60 more f-22's imperils the national security of the united states is, quote, completely nonsense. we are far and away the most superior air force in the world. why would we pour billions more into an area where we already dominate and continue to support aircraft that is not suited to the current battlefields in which we fight? we have to invest in low-tech equipment such as unmanned droughns which are effective in those areas of con-- conflict. always remember every defense dollar spent to bolster an area where we dominate is a dollar we don't have to spend to take care of our soldiers, strengthen our force, and improve in areas where we may be vulnerable and our 10e8ders -- soldiers may be vulnerable. again we have to simply stop spending more and start spending smarter. our soldiers deserve it. the taxpayers deserve it. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida has 6 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. diaz-balart: i ask my friend if she has additional speak

united states of america's strongest allies. israel seeks only peace with its neighbors and a homeland secure for its people. but if an attack from iran or a terrorist organization becomes imminent, this congress should declare that israel, like the united states should reserve for itself, the inalienable right to defend itself and protect its people. i encourage my colleagues to demonstrate their strong support for israel by supporting this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. berman: yes, mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to this amendment although i am not opposed to it. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. berman: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i don't know that we needed to say this but i'm glad we are saying it. it goes almost without saying that any sovereign country has an inalienable right to defend itself in the face of an imminent nuclear or military attack or threat. and nothing in this amendment prohibits o

but what we're here today to deal with is the security of the united states of america. he's complaining about an 85% increase in spending when my friend knows full well that spending came about because of tax cut the prosecution of two wars and the collapse of a banking system and an emergency in the united states of america to get us back on track and to change the direction of this nation. now what we're dealing with in this bill and the reason we need to bring it to the floor and act, not delay, not delay like we saw last week, with members circling the well, changing their votes, time and time again, or presenting amendments where they add a million, subtract a million to have an amendment. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. perlmutter: i will not. i will close. we are here because this is one of our most important responsibilities and that is to protect this country from terrorist attacks, foreign and domestic and to ensure our borders are secure. that's the purpose of the homeland security appropriations bill. the bill, at $42.6 billion is slightly above la

security needs addressed. therefore, we ask our friends in the international community today, led by the united states, for what is critical to the security of israel, clear- cut that meant that in a future peace agreement, the territory controlled by the palestinians will be demilitarized, namely without an army, without control of its airspace, with effective security measures to prevent weapons smuggling into the territory. real monitoring, and not what is happening today in gaza. it is obvious that palestinians will not be able to forge military pacts. without this, sooner or later, these territories will become another hamastan and that isn't -- that is something we cannot accept. israel must stop -- israel must control its security and fate. i told president obama that if we could agree on the substance, the terminology would not pose a problem. here is the substance i now state clearly -- if we receive this guarantee regarding demilitarization and israel's security needs and if the palestinians recognize israel as the state of the jewish people, then we will ready in a future peace agreement to reach a s

the united states sovereignty in prosecution on the war on terror, gun rights, abortions and being, many other issues. koh believes a nation who goes to war should have, must have united nations security council authority, going as far as writing that the united states was part of an access -- axis of disobedience by invading iraq, or should we say by liberating iraq. in october of 2002, koh wrote -- and i'm quoting now. he said "i believe it would be a mistake for our country to attack iraq without explicit u.n. authorization, because such an attack would violate international law." additionally he supports ratification of the international criminal court which could subject our troops to prosecution in a foreign court. implementation of this interpretation of the international law raises a number of alarming questions. if the united states is required to gain u.n. authority for military action, what punitive actions might the united states be subjected to if unilaterally uses preemptive force? would our navy seals have had to wait for authorization from the international body before rescuing the american being held hostage in the horn of africa? i think 99% of the american people sa

senator graham said recently, " the idea we cannot find a place to securely house 250-plus detainees within the united states is not rational." we have spent billions of dollars on high-security facilities. we can do that. our key facilities are being discussed by the administration, carrying with them the risk of abuse. i suspect that you and president obama will face these issues with the same commitment to our constitution, laws, and values, and the same jet it -- in the same dedication that you have shown so far. i trust you will find a resolution to these problems. another area where we have to come together is the sadly resurgent problem of hate crimes. last week's tragedy at the holocaust museum together with other incidents have made to clear that violence of bias and hatred remains a serious problem with the tragic real-world consequences. senator kennedy and i, together with a strong bipartisan group of co-sponsors across the political spectrum, once again introduced a bill that makes substantially important steps to strengthen our steps of the heat based violence. it has crafted into consideration

united states on these matters. moreover, insurers must have a federal regulatory voice on par with the banking and security sectors in our financial markets so that the industry can communicate with its peer regulators at home. in short, we can no longer sweep insurance regulation under the rug and cross our fingers that nothing will go wrong. we tried it before and learned that such an action may hide the mess for short term, but pose greater problems in the long term. as such, when the administration reveals its white paper tomorrow, i very strongly hope that it will recognize today's market realities and call for the establishment of better oversight for insurance holding companies and certain insurance activities, especially those most likely to pose systemic risk. moreover, i am confident that this administration will recognize the wisdom of creating a federal insurance office to advise a systemic risk overseer of the risks of the insurance sector, provide expertise in administration and congress on insurance policy matters, and communicate with foreign governments. i have long advocated for such an office by

securities markets for which we have primary concern. they are important for capital formation and millions of investors in the united states so the impact these securities derivatives can have on the primary securities market is a concern i would hate to see be decoupled. it has been as many durham of attacks have banned from their primary markets over the last 15 or 20 years or so but to me that's the most important linkage between the securities derivatives and securities markets and the same would be true for the markets at the cftc regulates. >> go ahead. >> i think you raise a very important point. we have to market regulators and the securities and options markets the sec regulates and futures markets that the cftc regulates and now we are bringing this market of derivatives with the congress held under regulation and derivatives have attributes of securities and a lot attributes of futures and in some cases more attributes towards future and those products i think we have broad agreement would be best regulated under the cftc and some that have far more at traits of securities that can clearly influence whether it is an issuer or

time, north korea and iran's nuclear capabilities have grown as credible threats to the security of the united states. north korea has threatened to quote, wipe out the united states and reportedly is preparing a ballistic missile to launch against united states. the president said iran's nuclear ballistic missiles provides a real threat. despite these increasing threats, the bill cuts missile defense from last year and this includes a 35% reduction to a missile defense in alaska and california designed to protect the united states' homeland. these cuts lack supporting analysis and challenge common sense. if north korea does what it says or if the president is right about iran, this may be one of the most crucial votes we take. the $2.6 billion to pay for equipment for our troops needs to be maintained at last year's missile defense funding level, will come from a department of energy account that has received $5 billion in stimulus funding on top of the baseline request. we may hear concerns from the other side of the aisle that we are skimming off the top of important environmental projects. but de