United States-Israel Rocket and Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of the Special Order that I and Leader Hoyer will be convening for the following hour.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, in the overnight hours of May 31, about 10 days ago, news broke that we now have become very familiar with--the previous speaker referred to it, and several of my colleagues have come to the floor this evening to talk about it--where a flotilla coming from Turkey was intercepted as part of the effort of the State of Israel to defend a blockade that was set up.

I want to spend the next hour talking a little bit about that boat and how it progressed, where it came from and why, and perhaps importantly drill into a little bit the idea of what the blockade is all about and what the history was. It is impossible to fully understand this issue only looking at it from the point of Israeli naval officers climbing on board a ship and saying, okay, I think I understand the story because I see that picture. That would no more be the truth than to watch the closing scene of Casablanca and say, okay, I understand what happened in this movie.

This was indeed a tragic thing. Anytime there is loss of life, anytime you have military officers, commandos climbing on a boat, something has broken down, something has failed. But what I don't think is fully understood, and still to this day isn't understood at capitals around the world, is who initiated this thing and why it was initiated.

Make no mistake about it, my colleagues, as Leader Hoyer will be mentioning when he arrives here shortly, the condemnation that rang around the world against Israel is almost a default position in European and Arab capitals of the world. There is almost no surprise. It is also true that those very same quarters are the ones that criticize the United States at just about any opportunity. And in many of those same places you also see far too much joyous chest beating anytime something like this goes down where the United States or Israel is involved.

It was undoubtedly unfortunate that it occurred, but it didn't happen by accident. If you look at the history of this incident, it actually started not on May 31, when the sailors climbed aboard that boat, but it started on May 17, a couple of weeks earlier. What happened then? What happened then was the Israeli Government got wind of the idea that this flotilla was leaving from Cyprus, Turkey, and said, look, understand that there is a blockade around Gaza that controls what can get inside of Gaza for obvious reasons that I will go into further later. But, frankly, to stop weapons from going into Gaza, because it is weapons and missiles that have come into the Gaza Strip, which is controlled by the terrorist organization Hamas, that have been used to terrorize Israelis. Terrorize to the magnitude of about 10,000 rockets have left from Gaza since Israel left it in 2007 and Gaza was controlled by Hamas.

So they say we have an internationally recognized blockade that's been supported by both the Bush and Obama administrations to prevent ships from coming in without their having their goods inspected. So what the Israeli Government did is they reached out internationally to the sponsors of this boat and to the people on the boat and said, look, you are welcome to bring your supplies here to Gaza.

So it was on May 31 that this boat was intercepted off the coast of Gaza, but it was May 17 that Israel said, look, if you are interested in bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza, you are welcome to do it. All you have to do is bring it into Ashdod, which is right here, and we will look at the goods, make sure there is nothing dangerous in there, and then we will allow it to be escorted into Gaza via truck.

That's not an unusual occurrence. In fact, as of this morning 11,972 trucks during this period of time the blockade has been in effect have been escorted in just such a way. It's not unusual for humanitarian aid to come into Gaza. Despite much of the rhetoric we have heard from the international community, Israel facilitates it through a process.

Now, the people on those boats, this humanitarian boat that theoretically was trying to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza, said, no, we are going to take this flotilla of boats and we are going to go into the teeth of this blockade. They were reportedly warned repeatedly, and no one has disputed that.

They were warned, look, a blockade is essentially a military thing.

It is the same type of thing that we used in our blockade of Cuba. It is a recognized blockade. Because if you think about it, there aren't a lot of ways--if you look at the map here, this little stretch of land is what we are talking about. It borders Israel on some sides. Egypt, which is a participant in the blockade, they support and help support the blockade that Israel has. This huge coast here has been used in the past, particularly by the nation of Iran, to import weapons in.

But instead, this humanitarian ship, which was no humanitarian ship as we later learned, this humanitarian ship, said, no, we are going to keep going. Now, I ask you, ladies and gentlemen, none of us are naval officers in this Chamber. Actually, Congressman Sestak is a naval officer, and I don't see him here today. But when it comes to enforcing a blockade, you don't have a lot of tools in your quiver.

Now, there are some ways that you can debilitate a boat, that you can stop its rotors from turning by essentially jamming it up from waters underneath. That was done with one, two, three, four, five of the other boats that you didn't hear about in the newspaper. But those boats were stopped using the efforts of the military in Israel to stop them in the most peaceful way possible.

Now, if a boat is coming into a blockade and it might pose a threat to Israel or to the United States, I mean, you can very easily change the names of the country and say a boat was coming from Yemen to the United States, and it's coming in and it wants to cruise down into the East River. Of course the United States would not let that happen, and the Coast Guard would say you are going to stop right here so we can inspect what's on this boat. And if they kept going, certainly we would not say, oh, that's okay. Every step necessary would be taken to stop them.

Well, that's kind of what happened here. What effectively happened was this boat said we are not going to stop, and they said we are going to leave the Israelis with no opportunity except to board the boat. That's what created the conflict. Israel did not create the conflict. They were essentially in a defensive posture, saying this is the line, don't cross it; and we are going to give you every opportunity before you reach the line to avert this conflict. The people on the boat chose not to. They wanted this conflict. They wanted this conflict. They did not want to deliver humanitarian aid; they wanted this conflict.

Well, once the conflict was upon the Israelis, I think by just about any definition of restraint the Israelis used restraint. They climbed aboard with quite literally paint guns on their shoulders to use when they landed. The only arms that they had were sidearms for the personal protection of these guys. And when they lowered themselves down on the boat, they were set upon by these humanitarian peace activists, I say with my tongue firmly in cheek. They were set upon with knives. They were set upon with steel poles. They were set upon with bullets. There were magazines and casings on the boat that did not match any of the Israeli sidearms. It was tragic that that happened. It was sad that it happened. But it was almost entirely the decision of the people on that boat.

Now, I say almost entirely, because that boat did not just appear out of the ether. It didn't just appear out of thin air. It had an enormous amount of support by some of the worst enemies of peace in that region, and some of the worst enemies, quite literally, not only of Israel, but of the United States as well. And I mean Turkey, Iran, Hamas. These are not entities that were looking for some peaceful resolution here.

Remember, once again to reiterate, here in the Gaza Strip, when elections were held in Israel, Israel does not any longer occupy the West Bank or Gaza. They left. They left it to the Palestinian people. This part here, the West Bank, is run by the Palestinian Authority.

Many of my colleagues know Mahmoud Abbas was here in Washington today and met with the President. This is a place that's had a great deal of economic growth. There has been a reduction in the amount of violence coming out of the West Bank. There are still problems, and I still think it is outrageous we provide any aid to the West Bank or Gaza so long as Mahmoud Abbas refuses to engage in direct negotiations for peace.

But putting that aside for a moment, in this area here, not the Palestinian Authority or Fatah, but Hamas, the terrorist organization Hamas that is funded by Iran, that gets their weapons from Iran and is in a declared state of war with Israel, has said they don't support a two-state solution, they support a no-State of Israel solution.

Now, who is it that has been supporting that? Actually, it's not Egypt here. They have been working very hard to enforce the border that they have here and help to enforce the embargo. But it's basically Iran. Iran has been exporting terror here, not only here, by the way, but also up here to Hezbollah, to Nasrallah in Lebanon through their agent Syria. But that is why the blockade exists. It's not just because Israel wants conflict. Quite the opposite: it's to try to prevent essentially a war going on here with more and more rockets and more and more armaments coming on shore.

So when this embargo is enforced, it's not only protecting the people of Israel; it's protecting the United States, because this is a way that Iran wants to set up essentially what is an agent of their own in the Middle East. That's what they want.

So when the Israelis boarded the boat, they were set upon. The sailors were beaten. They were stabbed and shot, as I said. And when the dust settles, we had an opportunity, as all the world did, to see what was on that boat.

Let me tell you what the humanitarian aid was that was on that boat: 100 units of metal rods of various length--well, I am sure that was going to feed a lot of children; 200 knives of various sizes; 150 military-style and Turkish-produced self-defense vests, military-style; seven electric saws; 100 pipe wrenches; 50 wooden clubs; 20 axes; a telescopic sight for a gun; four night vision goggles; 100 diving lights; 150 head lamps; and of course boxes and boxes and boxes of propaganda and tapes, all of them in Turkish.

Now, if there was a true interest on the part of this boat of providing food or aid to the people of Gaza, I believe they had an opportunity, obviously, to go to Ashdod and drive it in. They did not want that.

So what is the correct response of the United States and the world community when confronted with these facts? Well, we have a couple of things. First of all, we should understand that even if we are the last country on Earth that understands the facts that I have been laying out here, even if we are the last country on Earth that understands the importance of Israel's role in the region and how they are set upon in a similar way that the United States was on September 11, except the difference is they have that every day, we should stand with Israel. Even if we are the last country on Earth saying it, we should say, look, the facts are the facts here.

As much as we would like to say Turkey is a player for peace here, no, they were a player for war here. And as much as we might like to say you know what, boy, I wish everyone would just get along in that region, it's Israel who is now sitting at the bargaining table for peace and the Palestinians who are refusing to do so.

But I think, my colleagues, we also have to consider something else, and that is all our relationships with some of the players who are behind us. Let's consider Turkey. This would not have happened were it not for the nation of Turkey taking the role that they did. They funded the ship. They provided international cover. The Turkish Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, IHH as it's known in Turkey, has been linked to Hamas, and they helped to fund this. The Turkish Government just today voted against sanctions on Iran because, hey, this is apparently an agent, a country that they would like to be an agent for.

And for a lot of time, we kind of worship at the altar of the moderate Muslim state, the moderate Arab states that, you know what, we hope that they are there to be a fulcrum for peace, but it's not unlike a child wanting to see a unicorn. It would be great

if it happened, but we have to realize the facts are the facts, and NATO membership for Turkey has to be called into question here. We have to start to say to ourselves whose side is Turkey really going to be on, because what they did here is, rather than being an instrument for peace where they could have very easily said, We're sponsoring this boat. Go to Ashdod right here and offload the humanitarian aid. Or, We're sponsoring this boat. We're not going to have cases of knives on board. We're going to have cases of baby food because we want to help the people of Gaza.

That hasn't happened. And we also have to realize something else, and then I want to yield to some of my colleagues who have joined me.

We have to realize that the default position of Europe and the Arab capitals of the world is always going to be against Israel. We can't allow that and that alone to be the determinant of whether or not, of how our foreign policy is prosecuted. There's a terrorist state that controls Gaza right now. It's a terrorist state that, if they could, they would destroy the United States of America tomorrow, and they're starting with Israel.

The gentleman from Connecticut has been a great leader on this issue. I will be glad to yield to him.

I appreciate his thoughts and his leadership on this.

Just to put it in further context of the relationship between the United States and Israel, this is a tiny town of Sderot that you mentioned in your remarks. In the period of time since Gaza has been controlled by Hamas, there have been 6,066 rockets fired from that area into Sderot, 4,434 mortars. And I ask my colleagues to envision your town, envision the district that you represent, envision this city being under that type of barrage from a specific place. Do you think a blockade would be an excessive step to take? And that's why it's so important that we stand here today, and it's particularly important that Leader Hoyer asked us to gather today to make these points.

And before I yield to anyone else, I want to yield to the majority leader of the House of Representatives, Steny Hoyer.

Well, I thank you, and before the majority leader leaves the floor, I think on behalf of all of us in this institution, long before you were the majority leader here, it was hard to think of a Member of the United States Congress in maybe anytime in the 62-year history of Israel that has had a stronger sense of commitment to the U.S.-Israel relationship than you, whether it was leading this body in a condemnation of the Goldstone Report, a one-sided document produced by the United Nations; leading this institution in support for Israel and, in fact, for the United States during the Gaza war.

It is important, that final note that you made about who Hamas is, they are an enemy of Israel for sure, but they're also an outpost for Iran. We have something very strong in common with Israel beyond just our common sense of democracy and culture. We have the common enemy that when this boat was traveling, it was traveling essentially doing the bidding of Iran, and we have to recognize that Israel is on the front line of what is essentially a threat to us.

I want to thank you on behalf of all of us who fight all the time to keep that Israel-United States relationship close for all that you have done in leading this institution.

It is also important that we recognize something else that the majority leader said about the use of human shields on that boat. There were probably some people on that boat who were completely without malice; although most of the loudest voices made it very clear that all of them that we heard seemed to want nothing more than conflict and more than having Israel wiped from the face of the Earth. But remember, when there was the war in Gaza, when there was the war in Lebanon, the one thing consistent about agents of Iran that they always do, these terrorist organizations, they're always using human shields. They're putting civilians and putting weapons in the neighborhoods of civilians all the time.

I yield to the gentleman from New York.

I thank you. The gentleman from Florida, I would be glad to yield to you.

I would say to the gentleman, I would actually argue that the military of Israel used such restraint. I mean, frankly, there aren't too many ways to stop a boat. One of the ways is to fire upon it. They chose to put their own sailors in jeopardy; although there should have been no reason to believe that they would be on a humanitarian boat. Why would anyone expect that someone aboard a humanitarian aid ship would be set upon?

You know, to some degree the media has to be on notice that there is some responsibility to report the context of this thing as well, not just the end. When you see a sailor being tossed overboard, you know, it didn't seem like a very humanitarian act, and there was a shameful display by Reuters, who recently published a photograph of the sailor, the Israeli soldier, that fell on the ground, and they cropped out the guy standing next to him with a knife to explain where all that blood came from. That knife was held by someone on this humanitarian aid ship.

No one knows these facts better than Jerrold Nadler from New York. I would be glad to yield to him at this time.

If the gentleman will yield for a moment, that's right here. It's not like they were being diverted somewhere far off.

Exactly.

Just so everyone understands the points that Mr. Nadler is making, this piece of real estate, about the size of New Jersey, now has a terrorist agent here in Gaza in the south; a terrorist agent up here in Lebanon, governed by Hezbollah, at least about 25 percent of its government is, and Nasrallah, and Hezbollah controls this area here; and a terrorist agent of Iran right here in Syria, which once upon a time controlled literally the mountaintop overlooking the country.

So what the gentleman is describing is terrorist, terrorist, terrorist functions, all in support of the same enemies of the United States, and that's Iran.

Well, the gentleman makes an excellent point. And the gentleman from Virginia, I know, is expert on these issues, as well. And it is important to understand that, just today, Mahmoud Abbas was in town.

And I would gladly yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Nye), who has shown remarkable leadership on these issues in his brief time in the House, to pick up on some of the points that Mr. Nadler made.

Well, I thank you.

And you are exactly right. Our cooperation with the State of Israel has never been higher, in terms of military and intelligence.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a member of the Appropriations Committee, a powerful committee, who recently led a delegation to the Middle East which I was honored to be a part of. The House knows no stronger advocate for the U.S.-Israel relationship than she.

And I would point out, that same exact offer was made to this flotilla: Come to Ashdod right here. And it wasn't made an hour before; it was made 10 days before, as soon as the word got out, even before it had left port. The nation of Turkey, who was sponsoring this, and the sponsors of the boat were told, ``Listen, just go right here, and we will take a look at what you have, and then we will escort it militarily into Gaza for you.''

I thank the gentlewoman. And as someone who represents south Florida, you know that if a boat came churning towards the coast, and let's say it came from Yemen, and it had people on it who were chanting ``Death to Floridians,'' and it wouldn't stop when the military offered it an opportunity to, we would certainly not, as Americans, expect to say, ``Okay, we will just see what happens when it reaches shore.'' You are exactly right to point out the necessity of stopping it in international waters. That's where blockades happen.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), who also understands these issues and, long before she even came to this body, was fighting to preserve the Israel-United States relationship.

I thank the gentlewoman. And I really want to apologize for interrupting you.

Perhaps the most important fighter for Israel in this institution is the chairwoman of the subcommittee, the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Lowey). I'm glad to recognize you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the Chair regarding the votes that I missed on the following dates:

May 12, due to the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson, I missed the following votes:

Rollcall vote No. 259, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote No. 260, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote No. 261, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote No. 262, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote No. 263, I would have voted no;

Rollcall vote 264, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 265, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 266, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 259-266 on Wednesday, May 12, 2010.

I was not able to cast my votes during roll call 259-266 because I was in bereavement of the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson. Had I been present, for rollcall vote 259, on agreeing to the resolution, H. Res. 1344, ``Providing for consideration of the bill H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for rollcall vote 260, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 5014, `` To clarify the health care provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that constitutes minimum essential coverage,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for rollcall vote 261, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended, H. Con. Res. 268, ``Supporting the goals and ideals of National Women's Health Week, and for other purposes,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for rollcall vote 262, on agreeing to the amendment to H.R. 5116, ``Gordon Amendment No. 1,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for rollcall vote 263, on agreeing to the amendment to H.R. 5116, ``Hall of Texas Amendment No. 6,'' I would have voted ``no''; for rollcall vote 264, on agreeing to the amendment to H.R. 5116, ``Markey of Massachusetts Amendment No. 10,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for rollcall vote 265, on agreeing to the amendment to H.R. 5116, ``George Miller of California, Amendment No. 12,'' I would have voted ``aye''; for roll call vote 266, on agreeing to the amendment to H.R. 5116, ``Reyes of Texas Amendment No. 13,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

Tuesday, May 18, due similarly to the passing of my mother:

Rollcall votes 273 to 275, motion to suspend the rules, rollcall vote 273, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 274, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 275, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 273-275 on Tuesday, May 18, 2010.

I was not able to cast my votes during roll-call 273-275 because I was in bereavement of the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson. I would like to state for the record how I would have voted had I been present.

For rollcall vote 273, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 2288, ``Endangered Fish Recovery Programs Improvement Act of 2009,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 274, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 4614, ``Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 275, on motion to suspend the rules and agree, H. Res. 1327, ``Honoring the life achievements, and contributions of Floyd Dominy,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

On the 20th of May, due to the passing of my mother, I missed the following votes:

Rollcall vote 284, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 285, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 286, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 287, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 288, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 289, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 290, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 284-290 on Thursday, May 20, 2010.

I was not able to cast my votes during rollcall 284-290 because I was in bereavement of the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson. I would like to state for the Record how I would have voted had I been present.

For rollcall vote 284, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 5327, ``To authorize assistance to Israel for the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system,'' I would have voted ``aye''.

For rollcall vote 285, on motion to suspend the rules agree to, H. Res. 1256, ``Congratulating Phil Mickelson on winning the 2010 Masters golf tournament,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 286, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to, H. Res. 1336, `` Congratulating the University of Texas men's swimming and diving team for winning the NCAA Division I national championship,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 287, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 1361, ``Recognizing North Carolina Central on its 100th anniversary,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 288, on ordering the previous question, H. Res. 1363, ``Granting the authority provided under clause 4(c)(3) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives to the Committee on Education and Labor for purposes of its investigation into underground coal mining safety,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 289, on agreeing to resolution, H. Res. 163, ``Granting the authority provided under clause 4(c)(3) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives to the Committee on Education and Labor for purposes of its investigation into underground coal mining safety,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 290, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 5128, ``To designate the Department of the Interior Building in Washington, District of Columbia, as the Stewart Lee Udall Department of the Interior Building,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

Accordingly, I continued to miss time on the passing of my mother on May 24, and I missed rollcall votes 291 to 293.

I would have voted, on rollcall vote 291, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 292, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 293, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 291-293 on Monday, May 24, 2010.

I was not able to cast my votes during rollcall 291-293 because I was in bereavement of the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson. I would like to state for the Record how I would have voted had I been present.

For rollcall vote 291, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 278, ``Expressing the sense of Congress that a grateful Nation supports and salutes Sons and Daughters in Touch on its 20th Anniversary that is being held on Fathers Day, 2010, at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, the District of Columbia,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 292, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 1017, ``Chiropractic Care Available to All Veterans Act,'' I would have voted ``aye'';

For rollcall vote 293, on motion to suspend the rules and pass as amended, H.R. 5330, ``To amend the Anti-trust Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 to extend the operation of such Act for a 5-year period ending June 22, 2015, and for other purposes,'' I would have voted ``aye''.

On Tuesday, May 25, accordingly, I missed the following votes pursuant to the earlier statement:

Rollcall vote 294, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 295, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 296, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 297, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 298, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 299, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 300, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 301, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 294-301 on Tuesday, May 25, 2010.

I was not able to cast my votes during rollcall 294-301 because I was in bereavement of the passing of my mother, Ivalita Jackson. I would like to state for the Record how I would have voted had I been present.

For rollcall vote 294, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 5145, ``Assuring Quality Care for Veterans Act,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 295, on motion to suspend the rule and agree to H. Res. 437, ``Expressing support for designation of May 2010 as Mental Health Month,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 296, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res. 1382, ``Expressing sympathy to the families of those killed by North Korea in the sinking of the Republic of Korea Ship Cheonan, and solidarity with the Republic of Korea in the aftermath of this tragic incident,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 297, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res. 584, ``Recognizing the importance of manufactured and modular housing in the United States,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 298, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H.Res. 3885, ``Veterans Dog Training Therapy Act,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 299, on motion to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 2711, ``Special Agent Samuel Hicks Families of Fallen Heroes Act,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 300, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res.

1189, ``Commending Lance Mackey on winning a record 4th straight Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 301, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res. 1172, ``Recognizing the life and achievements of Will Keith Kellogg,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

May 26, I was unavoidably detained on official business. I missed rollcall vote 302. I would have voted aye;

Rollcall vote 303, I would have voted ``aye'';

Rollcall vote 304, I would have voted ``aye''; and

Rollcall vote 305, I would have voted ``aye''.

I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 302-305 on Wednesday, May 26, 2010.

Mr. Speaker, I was not able to cast my votes during rollcall on Wednesday, May 26, 2010, because I was away from the office on official business. I would like to state for the Record how I would have voted, had I been present.

For rollcall vote, 302, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 1347, ``Honoring the workers who perished on the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, extending condolences to their families, and recognizing the valiant efforts of emergency response workers at the disaster site,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 303, on motion to suspend the rule and agree to H. Res. 1385, ``recognizing and honoring the courage and sacrifice of the members of the Armed Forces and veterans, and for other purposes,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 304, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res 1316, ``Celebrating Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

For rollcall vote 305, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res. 1169, ``Honoring the 125th anniversary of Rollins College,'' I would have voted ``aye.''

I thank my friend for yielding. I thank my friend for leading this effort at my request, and I thank those who have joined in in raising our voice to defend actions that really need no defense, actions that any nation on Earth would take if it were similarly threatened, any nation on Earth.

Mr. Speaker, in the early morning hours of Monday, May 31, Israel naval forces intercepted six ships carrying mostly Turkish demonstrators attempting to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip. There was no confusion. That's what they said they were going to do. Israel gave them notice 2 weeks prior to this that they would not allow that to happen. So there was no confusion here about what was happening.

Five of the six ships complied with the IDF requests. The largest of them, however, the Mavi Marmara, refused, clearly bent on violent confrontation as it was boarded by Israeli defense forces, as they knew they would be. There was no confusion. These IDF troops were violently attacked with knives, clubs, and other weapons.

Let me remind you that in five of the six in this flotilla there was no violence. There was something in common on all of those ships. IDF forces were on all of those ships. But five of those ships, knowing full well that the blockade would not be allowed to be breached, offered no violent resistance.

At the end of the skirmish on the Marmara, seven members of the IDF had suffered injuries, including gunshot wounds and head trauma, and nine demonstrators, tragically, on the Mavi Marmara had been killed. No one wanted that result. I think not even those who were committing the violence on the IDF forces wanted that. But once violence is initiated, one cannot predict the outcome.

Those deaths are tragic. The events leading up to them deserve a full and scrupulous investigation. But this much, ladies and gentlemen, is clear. To call all the passengers of the Mavi Marmara nonviolent peace activists would be a victory for propaganda, not for fact. Peace activists don't launch attacks with knives and guns, and they certainly don't do so while chanting slogans calling for the death of Jews as an al Jazeera broadcast showed. Not an Israeli broadcast, but an Al- Jazeera broadcast showed the chants from those ships, from this ship, Kill the Jews.

However much we lament those nine deaths--and we do so--the fact is that the IDF was faced with an organized, violent assault and responded in self-defense, as we would expect any of our own forces to do wherever they may be sent to defend our country. Unfortunately, but not unsurprisingly, this incident has renewed international condemnation for Israel's blockade of Gaza from countries I suggest to my colleagues that would do exactly the same thing.

I cannot believe there's a country in Europe, in Asia, in Africa, in South America, or on the North American continent that would not say, If you breach this blockade that we have in place for our own security, we will confront you and stop you.

But that blockade exists for a reason: to keep weapons out of the hands of Hamas, a terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel and to random attacks on Israeli civilians.

Mr. Weiner has been pointing out the map. Probably most of us on this floor who are going to speak have been to Sderot. Some of us have been in the gymnasium that is an armed camp where it is the only safe place for the children of Sderot to play. Some have been with me to Sderot.

The attack on Israeli civilians has continued without abatement. I don't mean that it hasn't lessened from time to time, but never has there been a time when Israelis felt that the violence was concluded, because Hamas has made it clear that it will not conclude.

Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and to random attacks on Israeli civilians. The blockade was launched with the cooperation of Israel's neighbor Egypt when Hamas staged a violent coup to expel its political rivals and seize total control of Gaza. Who were its political rivals? Palestinians. The elected leadership of the Palestinian Authority.

And the blockade could end today, my friends, if Hamas recognized Israel's right to exist--as is the principle of the United Nations-- gave up its commitment to murdering civilians, and released the Israeli soldier it holds captive.

To the extent that life is hard for those in Gaza, the prime cause is the terrorist organization that keeps them hostage, holds power through violence, and monopolizes the food and humanitarian supplies that Israel allows across the border.

Indeed, ladies and gentlemen, my colleagues, pay close attention to this point. Indeed, it is Hamas, not Israel, that is currently preventing the humanitarian goods from this very flotilla from reaching the Palestinians in Gaza. Not the blockade, but Hamas.

Finally, the United States should and will resist all one-sided attempts to condemn Israel at the United Nations. The UN, a body committed by its charter to universal human rights, has for much of its history, unfortunately, been sadly fixated on singling Israel out for condemnation--the only democratic nation in that region of the world that recognizes human rights. And we see the Supreme Court of Israel saying, time after time, you cannot do that government. That is a nation of laws. Yet it has been singled out for condemnation as much more serious crimes and crises have gone unaddressed throughout the world.

The biased record extends beyond the infamous 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism. The U.N. General Assembly has convened an emergency special session 10 times. Not, I would suggest to you, when the North Koreans killed, obviously premeditatedly, 46 individuals in their ship of South Korea in South Korean borders.

Six of the times that they met out of 10 have focused on one small besieged nation, Israel, while no emergency session was ever held on the Rwandan genocide, not held on the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, not held on the genocide in Sudan.

The 2001 U.N. World Conference Against Racism neglected racism around the world to again single out, almost exclusively, Israel and Zionism. The U.N. Human Rights Council, whose members include Saudi Arabia, China, and Cuba, has only one permanent topic on its official agenda. Now, I have mentioned three genocides that have occurred. They are not on that agenda. Israel. Even Secretary-General Kofi Annan criticized the Human Rights Council for its ``disproportionate focus on violations by Israel.''

Should Israel comply with international law and the mores and values of the international community? Yes. Does it? Yes, yes, it does. And like every Nation, however, it enjoys the right to self-defense.

This troubled history is exactly why I'm skeptical that the United Nations will treat Israel justly now. What happened on Mavi Marmara needs a real investigation, not one colored by years of one-sided bias.

Mr. Speaker, despite what happened last Monday, the fundamentals of this conflict remain just as they were the day before. The overwhelming majority of Israelis want to live in peace with the Palestinians side- by-side in two States. So I believe do most Palestinians, but the extremism and hate of groups like Hamas stands in the way.

In my view, Mr. Speaker, there were those on those ships who sought this confrontation. Again, not for the purposes of humanitarian relief but for propaganda and for putting Israel at risk from those who wish its destruction. It is not a secret wish. It is an articulated wish. All the world knows the intent of Hamas: to destroy Israel and remove Jews from the Middle East because they say so.

Let us not be confused, Mr. Speaker. Finding a way to peace is fiercely difficult. It should not be made more difficult by those who see more propaganda value than human values and these loss of lives.

I thank my friend from New York for leading this Special Order that is so important so that our voices are heard here and around the world as it relates to our commitment to the sovereignty, security, and safety of Israel.

I thank my friend for his comments and thank him for his leadership.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

One of the foundations of America's national security policy is and must remain our deep alliance and our friendship with the democratic, Jewish State of Israel. We not only share our deepest values with Israel, but we also enjoy close, mutually beneficial, bilateral cooperation in many fields, including defense, intelligence, homeland security, science, technology and education. And as many have noted, Israel is a stabilizing force, and our alliance with Israel is a force multiplier in a region of great strategic importance to not only Israel but the United States.

In short, the United States' support for Israel advances our own security interests. But every day the threat to the democratic, Jewish State of Israel grows and continues to grow. As the Iranian regime draws closer to obtaining the capabilities for nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them, as that same regime sponsors Hezbollah, Hamas and other foreign terrorist organizations, and as the Syrian regime follows in its footsteps in these regards, the goal is very simple: To destroy Israel and the Jewish people, with the United States next.

Madam Speaker, the little fellow from the desert, Ahmadinejad, has denied the Holocaust. He has compared Israel to a ``germ,'' threatened to ``wipe Israel off the map,'' and has spoken of his goal of ``a world without America and Zionism.'' The dictator of Syria has threatened Israel with ``violent resistance.'' Hamas' covenant calls for killing Jews and destroying the nation of Israel. Hezbollah's leader has reportedly stated that ``If the Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.''

Madam Speaker, we should take these threats from Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas as serious threats to world stability, and specifically to the nation of Israel. They have backed up these threats with their evil deeds. For the last decade, thousands of rockets and mortars have been fired by Hezbollah from the north and Hamas to the south, sponsored by Iran and Syria with reported aid from the nation of North Korea. Since Israel's defense operations against Hezbollah in 2006, Hezbollah has rapidly rearmed again, thanks to Syria and Iran and North Korea, and reports indicate they now have over 40,000 rockets aimed at Israel.

Recent reports indicate that Syria is providing Hezbollah with long- range missiles that could strike most of Israel, and that some of that weaponry was reportedly manufactured by those folks in North Korea. I would add incidentally that it doesn't help matters when senior administration officials say the United States should build up what they call more moderate elements of Hezbollah. There are no moderate elements of Hezbollah. Hezbollah is not a mainstream political party. They are a blood-thirsty terrorist group. But I digress, Madam Speaker.

To Israel's south, Hamas and other violent militant groups in the Gaza area have fired thousands and thousands of rockets and mortars on civilian targets in southern Israel since 2000, killing, wounding and inflicting deep psychological trauma on Israeli citizens.

Madam Speaker, I doubt if we would long put up with rockets coming from the north of our border and from the south of our border, but the Israelis have to put up with the terror from the north and the south on a constant basis. Since the conclusion of Israel's defensive operation in January 2009, the rockets and mortars have abated, but they have not stopped entirely. In fact, over 200 have been fired in the last 16 months.

To defend the Israeli people, the State of Israel is developing a multi-layered rocket and missile defense system. It is a defense system, not an offensive system. It is called the Iron Dome for short- range threats, the David's Sling for medium- to long-range threats, and the Arrow for long-range ballistic missiles.

But as we know, national security comes at a heavy cost. Israel has a higher ratio of defense spending to gross domestic product and spends more on defense as a percentage of its budget than any developed country. Israel should not bear these costs single-handedly.

Madam Speaker, when Hamas and Hezbollah, backed by Iran and Syria, threaten Israel, they also are threatening us, and we need to respond accordingly. What we should do is stand with Israel just as Israel stands with us, and we should continue to provide Israel with the support it needs to defend itself by addressing and stopping the comprehensive threat posed not only by Hamas and Hezbollah, but their state sponsors, specifically Iran and Syria.

That is why I strongly support H.R. 5327, the United States-Israel Rocket Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act, which authorizes the United States to support Israel with the procurement, maintenance, and sustainment of the Iron Dome system.

I would like to thank my distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Nye) and the ranking member of our Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), and Mr. Turner from Ohio for sponsoring this vital legislation. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation and make the message clear: the United States will stand with Israel and our other allies, and we will stand against our mutual enemies, no matter the cost.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve.

Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the State of Israel, the nation of Israel, is not a big place. It's a little, bitty country. It's smaller than the State of New Jersey. From north to south, at the longest point, it's 200 miles. East to west, it's 75 miles. And ever since their existence, nations all around them have been wanting to destroy the nation of Israel.

Let there be no mistake about it, Madam Speaker. Israel is our ally. Israel has the absolute right of self-defense, to protect the dignity of its country and to protect its citizens. That is the first duty of every government and of every nation. This resolution helps Israel protect itself and its citizens.

Israel has the absolute right to exist. And it should be known to the world that we will stand with Israel to make sure they have the right to exist. Israel is saying to Hezbollah and Hamas, Syria, Iran, and even North Korea, Leave us alone. That is the right that Israel has, to be left alone in that region.

This resolution also says, Madam Speaker, and reaffirms a statement made 50 years ago by President John F. Kennedy when he made the comment in his inaugural address, and I quote, ``Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend and oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This we pledge and much more.''

This resolution, Madam Speaker, reaffirms that commitment by President Kennedy over 50 years ago.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5327) to authorize assistance to Israel for the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation and yield myself as much time as I may consume.

H.R. 5327, the United States-Israel Rocket and Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act of which I am a proud original cosponsor, authorizes funds for the State of Israel to facilitate the deployment of the Iron Dome missile defense system. I would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Nye) for introducing this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, as we all know, the residents of Israel are subject to the constant threat of terrorist attack--not just threat but actual attack. Israelis living in the southern city of Sderot have been terrorized by more than 8,000 indiscriminate rocket and mortar attacks on their homes, schools and communities. Passage of the U.S.-Israel Rocket and Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act today will help provide Israel with a reliable missile shield that could lead to a major strategic shift in Israel's approach to dealing with the persistent missile threat.

For years, the primary tool that Israel has used to protect its citizens from Hamas and Hezbollah missile attacks is an early warning system that sets off sirens telling people to hurry into bomb shelters. This is a passive defense which aims to minimize fatalities among helpless, unprotected civilians. The deployment of the Iron Dome missile shield will give Israel the capability to provide active defense. This advanced system has the capability of knocking Qassams, Katyushas, mortars and other deadly projectiles out of the sky, rendering them harmless.

President Obama's decision to provide the necessary funding to support Israel's deployment of the Iron Dome system demonstrates America's enduring commitment to Israel's enduring defense and the Obama administration's commitment to ensuring Israel's security. As Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently said, ``President Obama has affirmed, the United States' commitment to Israel's security is unshakable, and our defense relationship is stronger than ever, to the mutual benefit of both nations.'' Madam Speaker, U.S.-Israeli cooperation on the Iron Dome system will help advance the cause of peace by supporting Israel's ability to defend herself against terrorist attacks. This will give Israel the security it requires to live in peace and to make difficult sacrifices for peace. I believe defensive technologies like Iron Dome are a real-world necessity for Israel as it moves from proximity talks to direct talks and eventually to a final two-state solution.

Madam Speaker, the United States and our ally Israel share many of the

same security challenges, from combating terrorism to confronting the threat posed by Iran's nuclear weapons program. President Obama and the Democrats in Congress recognize the threat posed by Hamas and Hezbollah to Israel, and we will continue to do what is necessary to keep Israel safe and promote the cause of peace, but we cannot have peace until Israel is safe. Today we stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Israel in their quest for peace and the right to live lives free of terrorism. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yea'' on this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Nye).

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Nye).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Representative Moran from Virginia, a member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rothman), a member of the Appropriations Committee and its Subcommittee on Defense.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), chairwoman of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), the chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I shall consume.

Madam Speaker, I join in agreement with all the speakers who have spoken on this resolution, the importance of America's continuing friendship, support, and solidarity with the people of Israel.

Many speak about how this is an issue that is so important for America's national security, and that is true. I'm a New Yorker. You may have noticed that. I know with my accent I didn't have to say it. But I was also in New York on September 11, and like so many New Yorkers, we saw firsthand the threat of terrorism right at our doorstep; not just the threat, but the reality. And it's that threat and that reality that the people of Israel live with every day. They are on the front line. So, yes, it is in our national interest.

But it also speaks to the very morality and soul of our Nation that we stand by our friend, that we stand by our colleague in this world battle, and that is the nation of Israel. And so this bill is just one more step in that statement. It is important for America to do it because, if we didn't, then we would no longer be America.

Madam Speaker, at this time I have no further requests for time, and therefore, I yield the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.