Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, after evicting all Katrina survivors in temporary housing on March 15, FEMA has now announced that 55,000 families will lose their emergency housing assistance as of May 31.

Tens of thousands of these families are being told they are ineligible for further assistance because of FEMA's onerous and discriminatory rules.

Is this how we treat people who have lost everything?

Where do we expect families who have lost their homes, their jobs, even their city, to turn without housing assistance?

Nearly 9 months have passed since Hurricane Katrina hit. If FEMA can't help these families reclaim their lives, then Congress has to act.

Literally dozens of Katrina bills are still languishing in committees, including H.R. 4197, the most comprehensive relief package offered to date.

I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 4197 in support of Katrina's survivors.

Mr. Speaker, mock executions by putting the barrel of a shotgun into the mouth of a prisoner and pulling the trigger. Using alligator clips on ears, noses and genitals. Racial attacks and use of racial slurs, burns all over the body, electric shock to the genitals. Suffocation with bags.

In other words torture which is now almost synonymous with U.S. run prisons and detention centers. Immediately the U.S. facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and Abu Ghraib in Iraq come to mind when even the word is said.

But the question I have, Mr. Speaker, is how did we get to this point? Some prison activists immediately pointed out that we must not forget Attica when we are talking about Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib. And so I participated in a forum entitled, From Attica to Abu Ghraib.

But now as the memory of Attica has been invoked, it appears that another U.S. detention facility must be named too. Area 2 in Chicago, run by the Chicago police department. Area 2 will now go down in U.S. annals as a domestic torture center.

Sadly, over 135 African Americans have come forward to say that they were tortured, mostly in Chicago's Area 2, in what could be one of the greatest scandals of modern day American prison practice and procedure. Documentation shows that torture of African American men occurred in Areas 2 and 3 of Chicago jails for over 20 years, and no one with authority to stop it did so.

Moreover, these actions were covered up for 30 years by those in Chicago in authority. How many people are in jail today because confessions were tortured out of them? Incredibly, some prisoners were even on death row after having had confessions tortured out of them.

Moreover, the torture victims have psychological issues that have never been clinically resolved. Thank goodness former Illinois Governor Ryan commuted all of the death row cases, and gave full innocent pardons to four death row inmates who should never have been in prison.

Incredibly, even after Governor Ryan's actions, the City of Chicago is paying more than $5 million to lawyers who represent the accused police officers. How do we know about this? Due to the hard work and the thankless hours put in by activists, lawyers, and journalists who refused to let this issue go or be swept under the rug.

And thank goodness we have dedicated journalists for what is referred to as the alternative media, who are willing to write those stories and get the message out.

I learned about this story from Amy Goodman's Democracy Now broadcast on the Pacifica network of stations. This week or next, the judge will rule whether or not to release the report to the public. But in the interim, one thing is clear, and that is, that Areas 2 and 3 of the Chicago city jail must be added to the annals of U.S. prisoner abuse, from Attica to Abu Ghraib and beyond, Chicago now owns an unfortunate chapter.

Chicago's Abu Ghraib: UN Committee Against Torture Hears Report on How

Police Tortured Over 135 African-American Men Inside Chicago Jails

Extraordinary rendition. Overseas prisons. Abu Ghraib.

Guantanamo Bay. Practices and places that have become

synonymous with the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody are

getting renewed attention at the United Nations this week,

where the UN Committee Against Torture is holding hearings on

U.S. compliance with its international obligations. But there

is one name expected to arise this week that few people in

this country will have heard about--and it's the one that's

closest to home.

It's called Area 2. And for nearly two decades beginning in

1971, it was the epicenter for what has been described as the

systematic torture of dozens of African-American males by

Chicago police officers. In total, more than 135 people say

they were subjected to abuse including having guns forced

into their mouths, bags placed over their heads, and electric

shocks inflicted to their genitals. Four men have been

released from death row after government investigators

concluded torture led to their wrongful convictions.

Yet the case around Area 2 is nowhere near a resolution--to

date, not one Chicago police officer has been charged with

any crime.

The most prominent officer, former police commander Jon

Burge, was dismissed in the early 1990s. He retired to

Florida where he continues to collect a pension. Today, a

special prosecutor is now in the fourth year of an

investigation. Just last week, a group of Chicago police

officers won a court ruling to delay the release of the

prosecutor's preliminary report.

David Bates, one of dozens of men to come forward with

allegations of abuse at the hands of the Chicago police.

Flint Taylor, an attorney with the People's Law Office in

Chicago, which he helped found in the late 1960s. He has

represented many of the torture victims and was directly

involved in spearheading the special prosecutor's

investigation.

John Conroy a journalist and author who has covered the

case for over a decade. He has written several articles for

the Chicago Reader, and is the author of the book

``Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The Dynamics of

Torture.''

Amy Goodman. We go now to Chicago, where we're joined by

three guests: David Bates, Flint Taylor and John Conroy.

David Bates is one of dozens of men to come forward with

allegations of abuse at the hands of the Chicago police.

Flint Taylor is an attorney with the People's Law Office in

Chicago, which he helped found in the late 1960s. He has

represented many of the torture victims and was directly

involved in spearheading the special prosecutor's

investigation. And John Conroy is a journalist and author

who's covered the case for over a decade. He's written

several articles for the Chicago Reader and is the author of

the book, Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The Dynamics of

Torture. We welcome you all to Democracy Now! I want to begin

with Flint Taylor for an overview. You have been working on

this case for years. You have represented people who said

they were tortured. Give us the scope of this story.

Flint Taylor. Well, the scope started out with one man who

was tortured by electric shock and having a plastic bag put

over his head and being beaten by Jon Burge and others at the

Area 2 police station. He, on his own, brought a lawsuit in

the mid-`80s. That lawsuit, we got involved in, and over the

years we were able to uncover, with the help of journalists

such as John Conroy, others such as David Bates, who had also

been tortured and had told their stories in various courts,

but no one had put all this evidence together.

We were able to assimilate, over many years, over 60 cases

of torture, and when I say ``torture,'' I mean electric

shock, I mean suffocation with bags, I mean mock executions,

I mean racial attacks, that kind of thing. And they were all

coming out of the same station, and they were all headed up

by this man, Jon Burge, who came out of Vietnam, started out

as a detective and quickly rose in the ranks through

sergeant, lieutenant and commander. This went on--the actual

documentation now shows that this went on for over 20 years,

from 1972 to 1992, when in fact Burge was finally, after

community outrage, suspended and fired from his job.

As you said, he has never been prosecuted. The State's

Attorney of Cook County at the time this evidence first came

to light in the mid- `80s was none other than the now major

Richard Daley. The Superintendent of Police at that time

contacted him with the evidence of torture and said, ``Are

you going to prosecute this?'' Daley did not intervene or

prosecute at that time. Later on, his first assistant,

Richard Devine, became State's Attorney of Cook County.

Remarkably, Devine, while he was in private practice, had

been Burge's lawyer, defending many of these civil cases. He

then became prosecutor in 1997. Of course, he did nothing

either, because his clients were the ones that needed

to be investigated. So for 20, 25, 30 years, no one in the

prosecutor's office, the current mayor or the current state's

attorney, no one else did any investigation.

Finally, the community outrage was so strong with regard to

all of that that a special prosecutor was appointed. That was

four years ago, as you said. Four years of investigation has

led to his publicly saying that he now has 192 cases of

torture and abuse at Area 2 and later at the Area 3 station,

where Burge was transferred to later on. He now is talking

about releasing a report. He still is not talking about

indicting anybody. The rumor has it that, because it is so

long, that we're going to have a catch-22 situation, and

we're going to have the statute of limitations invoked by the

special prosecutor, who's going to release a report but say

it's too late to indict anybody.

Of course, we all say that that's ridiculous, that there

are ongoing conspiracy allegations and evidence that there's

an obstruction of justice going on in the various courts.

There's perjury going on. So, no one's going to be satisfied

if, in fact, all that happens is a report, no matter how

damning the report may be. So the struggle here in Chicago

continues and will continue, as long as people are still in

jail because of the confessions that were tortured from them,

and as long as Burge and others sit in Florida and other

places and collect hundreds of thousands and even millions of

dollars in police pensions, rather than to face criminal

charges, whether they be state charges, federal charges or

charges before the International Court of Justice.

Amy Goodman. We are also joined by David Bates. Can you

tell us what happened to you? When did it happen? Tell us the

whole course of events.

David Bates. Well, I believe it was October the 28th or

29th of 1983, when a few officers knocked on my mom's door

and announced that they were police officers and let my mom

know that I'll be taken away and that I'll be coming home

shortly. There were supposed to be some questions regarding a

case. Of course, I got to the police station. I was

questioned. I let the officers or detectives know that I had

nothing to do with the case. I knew nothing. This went on for

two days.

At that time, it was five sessions of torture, starting

with two with slaps and kicks and threats. It was two

particular sessions of torture that was very devastating, in

which a plastic bag was placed over my head. I was punched

and kicked. And I'll tell you, when you talk about torture,

you're talking about individuals who, most part, were young,

had a few brushes with the law, but never in a million years

thought that they would have a plastic bag placed over their

head.

More importantly, the torture has never been resolved. No

one has ever owned up to the torture. So we have hundreds of

individuals who have psychologically been warped, been

destroyed. There's never been any clinical resolution to the

torture. No one has owned up to it.

And I tell you, the fact that this attorney and this

journalist have spent years trying to uncover the truth and

community organizations and individuals--we're talking about

a city. We're talking about a state. We're talking about

legislators, who have not looked into the issue of torture,

and I say it's a shame. And I would like to commend these

gentlemen for working hard to bring the issue of torture out.

But I say it's time for the legislators and mayor and

individuals who had firsthand knowledge of it to come clean

with it and bring these individuals to justice.

Amy Goodman. Flint Taylor, I remember years ago with an

especially active group of mothers, mothers in Chicago of men

on death row, who kept raising the issue of this police

commander, Burge, and saying that their sons had been

tortured, that one had engraved in a metal bench in the

police station, ``I am tortured, I'm forced to confess,''

something like that. What about this? What about death row

cases, where men ended up on death row?

Flint Taylor. That's been a major, major piece of this

whole struggle against police torture. In the early and mid-

`90s, the movement against police torture and for human

rights came together with the anti-death penalty movement

here in Chicago and raised a very strong set of voices,

some of whom you've just mentioned. For people, there were

at least ten to twelve people on death row here in

Illinois who alleged and had evidence to show that Burge

and his men had tortured them into giving confessions, one

of whom was Aaron Patterson, whom you just mentioned, who

during a break in one of his torture sessions etched in a

bench that he had been suffocated with a bag and was being

tortured. That later came out.

Ultimately, due to the combination of the factors, and

articles that John wrote, and speaking out by David and

others in the community, and the work of various lawyers,

Governor Ryan looked at all of these cases, and as you know,

he not only commuted the sentence of all of those on death

row, some 160-odd people, but he looked specifically at four

cases of torture by Burge and others and found that those

individuals were innocent, that they had been tortured into

giving false confession, and he gave full innocence pardons

to those four individuals. That's Aaron Patterson, Stanley

Howard, Madison Hobley and Leroy Orange.

Those four men are now ``fortunate'' enough--and I put that

with quotes around it--to be able to, because they've been

exonerated, bring lawsuits in federal courts. So there is not

only the special prosecutor, but there are these lawsuits by

the individuals who have been pardoned in federal court,

where we are fighting the issues of torture and bringing out

evidence in that forum, as well.

And there's an obstruction of justice going on in that

courtroom, as well as against the special prosecutor, as the

city has paid over $5 million to a set of private lawyers to

represent the police officers, including Burge, in all these

cases. Burge now and his men--and there's now over 50

detectives that are named in one or more of these 192 cases--

they are all getting free lawyers, and they're getting the

advice from the city-paid lawyers to take the Fifth

Amendment. So you now have the spectacle of, in these federal

cases and in front of the special prosecutor, that former and

present law enforcement officers, rather than to answer

questions about whether they tortured and abused people like

David Bates and the men on death row, they have all lined up

and taken the Fifth Amendment as to each and every allegation

of police torture.

Amy Goodman. John Conroy, you're a journalist and author.

You've covered the torture case for over a decade for the

Chicago Reader, and you wrote the book, ``Unspeakable Acts,

Ordinary People: The Dynamics of Torture.'' How has this

taken so long to come out, though it has come out in parts

over the years and in certain communities well-known? And now

the question of whether, in fact, it will be released, this

report that among other people calling for this, four black

aldermen are calling for the public release of this report.

John Conroy. Well, it hasn't taken that long to be out. It

was out in 1990, when we did the story in the Chicago Reader,

the first story, and we've done more than 100,000 words

since. And I think that what's dragged on--the reason why

it's dragged on--I differ with the estimable Mr. Taylor here

on this--is that there is no community outrage. People don't

care. As in every society in which people are tortured,

there's a torture book class in Chicago. It's African

American men, most of them with criminal records. And they're

just beyond the pale of our compassion. We just don't care.

And that's why it's taken 15 years for you probably to do

this program and many others now interested in this report,

when the information has been out there for a very long time.

The New York Times, I think, it's covered this twice: once,

when the men were pardoned; and once, when there was a float

in the St. Patrick's Day parade that was going to honor four

of the officers who had been accused, and the float never

came to be in the parade, but there was a controversy

about it. So, that shows you, I think, the level of

concern in the United States about this issue.

Amy Goodman. We are talking to John Conroy, author of

Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The Dynamics of Torture.

We're also joined by David Bates, a torture victim, and Flint

Taylor, an attorney who has worked on this case for decades.

Amy Goodman. Our guests in the Chicago studio are John

Conroy, who is a journalist and author, covered the torture

case for over a decade for the Chicago Reader, author of

Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The Dynamics of Torture;

David Bates is also with us, as is Flint Taylor, attorney

with the People's Law Office in Chicago. David Bates, are you

going to sue the police department?

David Bates. Well, I have to consult with my attorneys

regarding that. I'll just have to say that in conjunction

with what Flint said and John, this has been going on for so

long, and there hasn't been the outrage needed to bring

attention to the torture in order to get those convictions.

But, again, I just want to commend individuals who have been

tirelessly working to keep this issue of torture in the news.

We have to look at this from a human perspective. These are

individuals who were tortured and beaten at the hands of

people who basically are supposed to serve and protect them.

And imagine keeping this thing and not being able to talk to

people about this. A lot of these gentlemen went to prison

and served long stints of time incarcerated. There was no one

to talk to about the torture. Even contact with public

officials or community leaders, it was no one to talk to

about it. And, again, I just want to commend everybody for

coming on board with this issue. But there's a lot need to be

done.

Amy Goodman. David Bates, did you hear about this happening

to other people at the time that this happened to you?

David Bates. Well, see, the problem comes in, is that when

you're in prison and you're in an environment like that, you

do not want to let anyone know that you made a confession,

whether you were tortured, whatever--however you made the

confession, it was not in your best interest to expose that

while you were in prison. You would be considered weak. So,

imagine these individuals in prison not able to even seek

legal help and advice. I liken it to being raped, honestly.

Individuals not able to be--go for help. Then, when you did

go for help, when you had the opportunity to go for help,

people said it didn't happen. So, I tell you, when you get

rid of all--when you get down to the human aspect of this

problem, you're going to deal with a lot of sick men, a lot

of sick men that need clinical-- some type of clinical help

to deal with the torture.

Amy Goodman. David Bates, when you saw the pictures at Abu

Ghraib, what were your thoughts?

David Bates. Well, the pictures, I'll say this. My thoughts

on the whole process was: how the hell did they get hearings,

and torture from anywhere is wrong. But as we've spoke on,

this torture has taken place for over two to three decades in

America, on the Southside of Chicago. Why didn't we have

public hearings? Why didn't the state legislators come in and

do investigations? We actually had to go outside the country

to an international court to deal with police torture. On

October the 14th, the People's Law Office and other attorneys

met in front of the Organization of American States to bring

attention to the issue of torture, and we're looking for

delegation of individuals to come in and to ask Mayor Daley

questions that he hasn't been able to answer to the public

since this Jon Burge stuff has been going on. And I tell you,

it's going to be an embarrassment to a lot of people, but

like my good friend Conroy said, they've been knowing

about it.

Amy Goodman. Let me ask about the knowledge to the very

top. Some are saying--and I want to put this question to

Flint Taylor, attorney with the People's Law Office in

Chicago--that the report could well implicate, as you were

talking about, the State's Attorney, Richard Daley, his

assistant Richard Devine, who now holds the top job. Can you

talk more about how they knew, the whole issue of them being

told early on?

Flint Taylor. Well, as I said, Richard Daley was previously

the State's Attorney of Cook County. In 1982, when one of the

major--the first major case broke with regard to police

torture, the Andrew Wilson case, the superintendent of police

was informed by the head of the hospital, the prison hospital

where Andrew Wilson was being held, that there was serious

evidence of torture, that Andrew Wilson not only said, but

had physical evidence that supported the conclusion that he

had been tortured by electric shock, by beating, and he had

15 injuries all over him, burns and everything like that. And

the head of the hospital was so shocked, he brought it

straight to the superintendent of police.

The superintendent of police then brought it straight to

Richard Daley. He knew that Andrew Wilson had been charged

with very serious offenses, shooting two police officers and

killing them. So Daley decided that rather than to

investigate the criminal activities of Jon Burge in torturing

Andrew Wilson, that that would, in fact, undercut and

undermine, he thought, the prosecution of Wilson, so he did

nothing. He did no prosecution at that time.

He then presided over the next eight years over the State's

Attorney's office, which was complicit in taking over 55

confessions from 55 different victims of Burge and police

torture. In all of those or many of those cases in the

individual courts, there was testimony from those victims

that they had been tortured. However, Daley defended all

those cases, put all those people behind bars, many of them

on death row, and in no instance did he investigate the

continuing allegations that were coming out of Burge's police

headquarters that people were tortured. Daley then went on to

be the mayor of the City of Chicago.

There was--and John and I disagree in the sense that there

had been at times public outrage. The public outrage reaches

certain proportions at different times. We're at one those

key points again today. We had been in the early '90s. And

one the reasons for that was this Andrew Wilson trial that

brought out all this evidence and put together all these

different allegations of torture. Because of all of that, the

police department was forced to reinvestigate. This was in

the early 1990s.

They put an honest investigator in charge of the

investigation, and lo and behold, he came to an obvious

conclusion. He said there was systematic torture at Area 2.

He said he had looked at 50 cases, and there was systematic

torture. Well, what did the superintendent of police do? He

suppressed that report. He then met with the mayor of the

City of Chicago, after we had gotten that report released by

a judge, and he and the mayor, who is now Richard Daley,

instead of saying, ``Now we have the evidence to prosecute.

Now we should proceed. Now we should lock Burge up,'' what

did they do? They not only attempted to suppress the report,

but then they went publicly and discredited it. Daley stepped

forward and said, ``These are only rumors and innuendo.'' So,

at every point, as I've mentioned, Daley, rather than taking

his responsibility as chief law enforcement officer and chief

executive officer of the City of Chicago, moved to suppress

and to do nothing.

Amy Goodman. Legally--let me ask you, Flint Taylor.

Legally, if crimes are known about, and they are covered up,

is Mayor Daley criminally liable?

Flint Taylor: Well, at this point, is he criminally liable?

I suppose you could see him a co-conspirator, in that it was

certain obstruction of justice over the years, certainly. But

I think at this point what we're looking for is if a special

prosecutor comes out with a report and says, ``I can't

indict, because it's too late,'' then the people of the City

of Chicago have to look in two directions. They have to look

backwards to Daley and Devine and say, ``Well, the special

prosecutor was hamstrung by the fact that Daley and Devine

didn't act when they should have,'' and then we have to look

forward and say, ``That's not sufficient. That's not right.''

There are continuing criminal violations here, and if the

special prosecutor won't do anything about them, then

Fitzgerald, who is the U.S. Attorney here and who, of course,

has made his name in the Valerie Plame case and has already

indicted Daley's people in a wide-ranging truck scandal, he

has to open his investigation into federal RICO or

racketeering charges, as well as obstruction of justice and

perjury. And as David has mentioned, it has been taken to the

international forum, not only last fall to the Inter-American

Commission on Human Rights, which is the Organization of

American States, who is still looking into this issue, but

this past week and right now, it's been presented to the

Committee Against Torture of the United Nations in Geneva,

and one of our people has spoken with and presented evidence

to the Committee Against Torture, and that committee has

ordered the government to respond and to speak to the issues

of torture here in this country. And in its concluding

remarks, it put with Abu Ghraib and put with Guantanamo the

situation of Chicago.

And so, perhaps there's not enough public outrage here, but

the international community is looking at it in a very strong

way, and to hear Chicago put in the same breath with

Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib is something that--if that doesn't

wake up the powers that be here in the City of Chicago and

that doesn't wake up the U.S. Attorney's office and that

doesn't, in fact, put on the carpet the State's Attorney of

Cook County and the Mayor of the City of Chicago, I don't

know what will.

Amy Goodman: John Conroy, the Midwest Coalition for Human

Rights will present a report that includes the Chicago

torture allegations to the U.N. Human Rights Commission. How

significant is this? And, finally, why do you call your book

``Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People''?

John Conroy: Well, let me take the second question first. I

call the book ``Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People,'' because

torture is always done by--we want our torturers to be

monsters, but it turns out that they're just ordinary people

like you and me. And I can go back and cite you all kinds of

psychological experiments in which they have found that

people will do extraordinary things, inflicting pain on other

people, if they are simply ordered to do so, simply following

orders someone else is taking responsibility. And it doesn't

require any sort of a twisted mind to do this. We are all--

most of us are given to obedience. And so, I've interviewed

torturers from around the world, former torturers, and they

all struck me as very ordinary men.

How significant the international attention will be remains

to be seen. It's a unique turn, and it's somewhat thrilling,

I think, for those of us who have been watching this for a

long time to see it finally raise to the level of being

mentioned in a phrase with Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. But

whether this will just be one of those media--you know, where

the media comes in for a day or two and then leaves remains

to be seen.

Amy Goodman: And what's the timetable on this?

John Conroy: The special prosecutor is supposed to--I'm

sorry. The judge who oversees the prosecutor is supposed to

rule, I believe, on the 12th of May, as to whether the report

will be released or not.

Amy Goodman: That will be Friday, and we will certainly

follow it up. I want to thank you all for being with us:

David Bates, torture victim himself, telling his own story;

Flint Taylor, attorney with the People's Law Office in

Chicago, who has represented many of the victims; and John

Conroy, who has written about this for years for the Chicago

Reader, author of ``Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The

Dynamics of Torture.''

Mr. Chairman, the Congressional Black Caucus budget is a better statement for our country's values. Educators are asking for a fully funded No Child Left Behind because America's children are being left behind; seniors deserve accessible health care, but Medicare part D is leaving everyone confused; and veterans are only asking to receive the health care that recruiters promised them and that they deserve. But, you know, Tupac observed a long time ago that there's money for war, but we can't feed the poor.

Sadly, a study done by the Pentagon estimated that Halliburton has received over 52 percent of the $25 billion that it has paid to contractors. The study also shows that Halliburton presented questionable bills for nearly $2 billion, lost prefabricated bases worth over $75 million, and yet Halliburton still gets new contracts.

If this Congress wants to truly balance the budget and satisfy the needs of working Americans, it should vote to pass the Congressional Black Caucus budget.

Mr. Chairman, I anticipate today that mine will be one of the few votes against this bill, just as I cast the only dissenting vote on the bill in committee. I have submitted a thoroughgoing written statement of the reasons for my dissent.

President Theodore Roosevelt said, ``To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.''

The American public are expressing their criticism of our President and his war in opinion polls showing the President's approval rating is the lowest it has been during his tenure. But Congress continues to march in step with the President's war plans. The wars and military operations we are funding through this defense authorization act are based on a simple use of force authorization passed by this Congress in October of 2001, which was to have been linked to the provisions of the War Powers Act of 1973. Thus, it is Congress that paved the way for the disastrous war in Iraq, and Congress must accept that it too bears responsibility for this war.

No regular review of that authorization has taken place, which has been cited by the President to justify preemptive war, the creation of a dual legal system, military tribunals, imprisoning enemy combatants without due process, the abandonment of the Geneva Accords and U.N. principles relating to war, extralegal secret renditions involving illegal methods of interrogation, including torture, expanded secrecy and attacks on civil liberties at home.

Calls from the executive for ending the principle of separating military and civilian policing by rescinding the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 should send a chill to all who value civil liberties. We are quick to honor our young men and women in uniform with words and medals, but do we honor them where it really counts, in the pocketbook? In the hospitals for amputees and third-degree burns? We must do a better job of representing the American people and our people in uniform.

Unchecked fraudulent recruitment, failed retention, violation of rights and regulations, stop-loss policies and over-rotation, lack of adequate protection for combat troops, protection of rights of conscience, diminished medical care for troops and their families, decreases in veterans benefits, environmental damage done by the manufacture, storage and use of military weapons, falsified benefits and bonuses, and privatization of functions all remain inadequately addressed by the passage of this bill, and in some cases, they are worsened.

By passing this bill virtually without dissent, the Congress is effectively legitimizing these unprecedented actions of the executive.

As we enter a fourth year of war in Iraq, the level of violence in Iraq continues unabated. It is higher than it has been at any time since the U.S.-led invasion of March 2003. As we enter a fifth year in Afghanistan, there is renewed violence and the specter of another drawn-out war. Meanwhile, our military budget continues to grow to unprecedented levels along with the deficits it is creating.

We now have a larger and more lethal military force and a more expanded intelligence budget and consolidation than we did at the height of the Cold War. That threat has receded, but the threat of unconsolidated and ill-equipped terrorist groups has been used to expand the funding of huge corporate contracts for weapons and war while denying the human suffering and needs that face us.

According to Pentagon figures, we are spending $9 billion a month to wage wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That comes to $300 million a day, $12.5 million an hour, over $200,000 a minute, and $3,500 a second.

After the Second World War, President Truman set up a commission to investigate war profiteering and the government asked that corporations plow their war profits back into social programs to help rebuild the postwar economy. But today, corporations are profiting from war and its related military activities as never before, with a green light from the White House to proceed, despite massive abuse, waste and corruption.

Our current military budget is larger than the budgets of every other major country in the world combined, both allies and perceived enemies. Our nuclear arsenal and other weapons systems are maintained and defended, while new systems with questionable utility are designed and promoted each year.

It is time for these wars to end and for alternative military budgets that reduce the waste on flawed weapons systems to be considered by this Congress. More diplomacy, less Pentagon waste on little or nonused weapons systems; less support for corrupt regimes in the developing world; more support for the judiciary and law-abiding regimes that respect human rights; and most of all, a global plan to eliminate poverty.

Those who commit acts of terrorism may not themselves be motivated by poverty, but they are able to thrive where they can exploit the hopes and dreams of the poor and the oppressed. As many have said, terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. The victory over terrorism will not come through war, but through peace and prosperity.

Madam Speaker, the American people seem wedged between record oil company profits, half-billion-dollar retirement packages for oil executives, and a Federal energy policy that just does not work. Now Americans have to choose between not only medicine through a prescription drug plan that is a boon to pharmaceuticals and a doggle to the people who need the drugs, but the people are also being victimized by a secret energy plan drawn up by oil barons. For years, people like me have been saying that this Nation needs to decrease oil dependence, that it was depletable, causes global warming, was not worth destroying ANWR or waging wars over.

Better policy is possible, but we won't get it from this administration of oil barons.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House out of order for 5 minutes.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend, celebrate and commemorate the military service of Brigadier General ``Big John'' Collins, Lieutenant General Cuthbert A. ``Bill'' Patillo, Major General Charles C. ``Buck'' Patillo and Major General Joel B. ``Bill'' Paris.

These four generals were, in the year 1946, founders of the first State of Georgia Air National Guard Fighter Aircraft Wing, the 54th Fighter Wing.

Big John Collins is a friend of mine. This friendship began when my efforts resulted in him getting his long overdue war medals. Big John had tried for 20 years to get his medals. And he was a pilot. Bill and Buck Patillo are identical twin brothers who, along with Bill Paris, flew Republic Aircraft Corporation P-47 Thunderbolt fighter aircraft. These four pilots formed a tight ``Diamond'' attack formation.

These four pilots were ordered to fly at air shows around the State of Georgia to boost enlistments in the Georgia National Guard. The idea was a great success; so successful, in fact, that the increase in Georgia enlistments came to the attention of the National Guard Bureau at the U.S. Air Force headquarters at the Pentagon. This work of these four pilots was the foundation upon which the U.S. Air Force Thunderbirds Precision Flying Team was created to rank along with the Blue Angels Precision Flying Team of the U.S. Navy. Air Force Chief of Staff General Hoyt Vandenberg credited the Georgia Air National Guard with being the founders of the Air Force Thunderbirds Precision Flying Team.

All four of these pilots are alive today. They are healthy, and they are happy to have their service recognized in this way. Although the Patillo twins now live in Valrico, Florida, near McDill Air Force Base, I am proud to say that they were born in my district in Decatur, Georgia. Bill Paris was born in my home State and still lives in Georgia, in Alpharetta. Big John Collins, my friend, was born in Oklahoma, raised in Bradenton, Florida, but saw the light and found his way to Georgia where he has lived since 1939. I think he found our sweet Georgia peaches too irresistible to leave.

Bill Paris was a leading fighter pilot ace destroying nine Japanese aircraft. Bill Patillo destroyed a Japanese version of the German ME 262 rocket-powered fighter, one of only three of such fighters destroyed worldwide in World War II. Plus Bill destroyed five other Japanese aircraft. Buck Patillo destroyed five Japanese aircraft. And big John Collins, my constituent who has now become my friend, shot down three Japanese fighter aircraft. Sergeant James Campbell shot down two Japanese fighter aircraft. Sergeant Donald Schopp shot down one Japanese fighter, making a total of six enemy fighters downed on one mission. Plus one Japanese war ship exiting Simpson Harbor at full speed was destroyed. Big John Collins led an attack on Tobera Air Drome, destroying numerous Japanese aircraft on the ground.

Bill and Buck Patillo, Bill Paris and Big John Collins collectively received the following combat medals: 4 Silver Stars, 9 Distinguished Flying Crosses, 9 Legion of Merits, 36 Air Medals, 5 Distinguished Service Medals, 9 Presidential Unit Citations, 4 Government of the Philippines, 2 Croix de Guerre with Palm, US SWPA medal with 9 major campaign battle stars, 121 various noncombat service medals.

Sixty years after the conclusion of World War II, all Americans should renew and rededicate their honor for the noble sacrifices, valorous deeds and enduring accomplishments of military veterans of what has become known as the greatest generation.

I would also like to commend my sister colleague, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur, who just spoke, who fought hard to get a memorial on the Mall for them, the greatest generation, including for my four Georgia pilots.

Congratulations to them all for a job well done.

Mr. Speaker, I come before this body to personally express again my sincere regret about the encounter with the Capitol Hill Police.

I appreciate my colleagues who are standing with me, who love this institution and who love this country.

There should not have been any physical contact in this incident.

I have always supported law enforcement and will be voting for H. Res. 756 expressing my gratitude and appreciation for the professionalism and dedication of the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police.

I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, I regret its escalation, and I apologize.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in protest at this Administration's egregious treatment of tens of thousands of families of survivors who were displaced by and continue to suffer in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Today, on the Ides of March, some ten thousand families are being evicted from temporary housing in hotels by

Mr. Speaker, today is the third anniversary of the murder of Rachel Corrie, an American who was crushed to death by Israel's American-manufactured Caterpillar bulldozers. Rachel was protesting the Israeli Army's illegal bulldozing of Palestinian homes in the Gaza Strip. The Corrie family has filed suit against Caterpillar, charging it with knowingly selling machines used to violate human rights.

From the Rachel Corrie website I found a link to these lyrics by Ten Foot Pole entitled, ``Rachel Corrie.''

``Rachel Corrie''

You heard of Rachel Corrie?

The press won't tell her story

Caught between a house and bulldozer

She found out that Israel

Hates gardens and it will kill

Americans who help rebuild the Gaza Strip.

Let's pretend that everything will be OK

It's not our fault let's look the other way

And go to films or dance lessons or baseball games at night

and trust elected leaders to choose right

I hurt for Rachel's father

To bury his young daughter

And her belief in human goodness

He taught her to fight violence

Now all that's left is silence

And the memory of her dignity

Let's pretend . . .

Rachel I hope you find justice or even a

garden where anyone can grow some food in peace

No guns, no need to fight. No poor, no black no white,

Heaven, you deserve a break from misery

Thanks to Maarten Joostens ([email protected]) for these lyrics.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Pentagon announced that it is returning $288 out of $300 million it was holding while investigating Halliburton for overcharging, even though Halliburton was previously caught overcharging the Pentagon by $27 million for meals for our troops.

Mr. Speaker, even as tens of thousands of Hurricane Katrina survivors face eviction due to FEMA, the United States Government is handing hundreds of millions of dollars to a company which has been plagued by allegations and admissions of fraud, waste, abuse, bribery and kickbacks.

The Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq was itself unable to account for $9 billion, with over a billion of this reportedly having been lost to Halliburton.

Today, I urge Congress to establish a permanent war profiteering committee modeled after the Truman Commission after the Second World War.

Before this Congress writes the President another blank check, we need to investigate the gross incompetence and even corruption that exists with this administration.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin my remarks this afternoon by congratulating first of all the people of Haiti, a small, very poor country that is our neighbor, but a country whose people still believe in the power of democracy. They still believe in the power of the vote. And so despite all odds, despite all intimidation, the people of Haiti overwhelmingly showed up at the polls and they voted. And not only did they show up at the polls and vote; they demanded that their vote be counted.

Now, we understand that there were about 85,000 ballots that had nothing on them. They were probably ready to have something put on them. But the people of Haiti demanded that the vote that was actually voted and the results of that actual vote count be the results of the election.

And I am also down here this afternoon to congratulate not only the people of Haiti, who prevailed, but to congratulate Rene Preval, who was their candidate of choice.

Now, the people of Haiti have to be congratulated because they have gone to the polls over and over and over and over again. They have gone to the polls. A few years ago, when I had just come to Congress, they went to the polls, before I got to Congress, they went to the polls and they elected a former priest, a man of the cloth, a man of the community, of the neighborhood, a man of the poor to represent them.

And hired thugs who were on the CIA payroll, whose leader enjoys the solace and solitude of America's neighborhoods, he should not even be here, helped to oust President Aristide.

And so the hopes and aspirations of the people of Haiti, who were finally able to throw off the yoke of American-imposed and -supported dictatorship, saw their hopes and their dreams vanish once again.

But thank goodness there was an administration in Washington, DC and there was a change in the face of the Democratic Caucus and so Members of the Congressional Black Caucus would not stand to allow this outrage to continue. And so working in concert with the Clinton administration, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus worked day in and day out and successfully saw the return of Jean Bertrand Aristide to power.

But that was not enough. Because, as soon as Clinton was out of office, and the George W. Bush administration was in office, something else happened, after the people of Haiti voted to renew President Aristide's mandate. And what happened happened 2 years ago.

The people of Haiti, in free, fair and transparent elections, elected Jean Bertrand Aristide to another term in office. U.S. Armed Forces showed up at his house and took him and his family away, put them on a plane, destination unknown. Kind of like what happened with the Katrina survivors.

So once again, the people of Haiti saw that when they went to the polls, participated in the process, put their full faith and confidence in the power of the ballot box, ballot box, not bullets, that bullets from some place else could come and dash their dreams. So now former President Aristide lives in South Africa.

I have to acknowledge the tremendous role that was played by my sister Congresswoman, Ms. Waters. Here she is. Now I am all discombobulated because my sister is here.

I will let her tell her story.

Maxine, can I invite you to please tell the story of how you saved a little piece of America's honor by making sure that Jean Bertram Aristide was at least safely delivered to his final destination.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my sister.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry. I would like to suspend my special order. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) has requested a 5-minute special order.

Mr. Speaker, I have an hour, so I will yield to the gentlewoman.

congratulating rene preval, president-elect of haiti

I would like to point out that there were certain Members of Congress who actually traveled with Condoleezza Rice and they came back and said that Condoleezza Rice had promised that there would be some ballot access in Cite Soleil; isn't that correct?

I am absolutely blown away by the things that Congresswoman Maxine Waters just said. She reminded us that the French and the Americans and the Canadians, which I did not realize that the Canadians were involved in this, they all got together to oust a duly elected president.

But now let me just tell you that from 2000 in Florida this President was not duly elected. I will say that because the election was stolen, and we all know that the election was stolen. And it is interesting that you would use invalid ballots, blank ballots. This is the same mechanism that was used to disenfranchise black people in this country in 2000 in the presidential election. And so now, of course, they surface again in Haiti, invalid ballots, blank ballots. But the people of Haiti took to the streets.

They demanded a fair vote count, and they got a fair vote count, and they got a President.

I want to thank my sister congresswoman for joining me on the House floor but also for those strong and powerful words. Because she is absolutely right, that it is our responsibility now that the people's voices have been heard and so now we have to respect that. We need to respect that.

I want to shift gears for just a moment, and I do not think this poster should present a surprise to anyone as to what I am going to talk about now, and that is Hurricane Katrina. I want to remind people of these images that went all over the world. The black person who is trying to go through the water for food is looting. That is what Associated Press writes. That is what

Associated Press wrote, the black person was looting. Agence France- Press saw these white people, and they were finding bread and soda. Blacks loot; whites find. There is nothing more stark.

This is the beginning of the Hurricane Katrina story, and this is the way Hurricane Katrina was portrayed to the American people and throughout the world. We need to question all of the press images from not just Associated Press but every newspaper and on television.

What were our administration leaders doing as New Orleans was filling with water? The President was on vacation in Texas at the ranch. The Vice President was on vacation in Wyoming. He was fly fishing. The Secretary of State was visiting New York City and even in the midst of what was happening in New Orleans, she got booed, so the press reports tell us, because she took in a play, and then after she took in a play she went shopping for Ferragamo shoes and bought $7,000 worth, reportedly, of Ferragamo shoes, and then, after that, she decided to play a little tennis. Donald Rumsfeld took in a Padres' game in San Diego, and Michael Chertoff, who is the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, who is charged with taking care of the United States in a time of great trial and stress and catastrophe, stayed at home.

So, as a result, the select committee that was formed by this Congress to investigate the government's preparations for and actions during Hurricane Katrina issued a report yesterday. The name of the report, ``A Failure of Initiative.'' It is a huge report.

The bottom line is that Secretary Chertoff needs to resign. It is amazing to me to see the Secretary on television through the powers of C-SPAN doing an intellectual dance, trying to defend the indefensible.

What happened to the people of the gulf States region and what is happening to them today is indefensible. And if thousands of families are being kicked out of their temporary homes, their temporary housing which was the hotel rooms, that is the responsibility at the end of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security who said, okay, we will let FEMA go ahead with that call. Of course, the President bears responsibility, too, and he has accepted responsibility, but I have not yet heard Secretary Chertoff accept responsibility.

Another sad fact about Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath is that in the metropolitan Atlanta area we have about 60- to 70,000 Katrina survivors. They want to go back home, many of them, but there is so much uncertainty because, as the congresswoman from Florida said earlier, there is still uncertainty as to how the Hurricane Katrina survivors are going to be treated.

I have introduced legislation that will force the EPA to look at tests and make public the environmental circumstances under which people will be returning, in particular to New Orleans. It is a shame that we would have to have legislation in order to get the EPA to do its job, but, right now, structures are being tested for habitability on their structural soundness but not on their environmental soundness, and we have that toxic sludge that is everywhere.

So I would ask that this Congress look at the omnibus piece of legislation that was dropped in and signed by all of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus which addresses all aspects of the problem faced by those Katrina survivors.

In addition, I find it curious that the panel that produced this, what some people are calling, scathing report was boycotted by the Democrats. Well, it was boycotted by the Democratic leadership. I chose to participate in it because there is one thing about participating in Congress. We are elected, we come here, we write, and we speak, and everything that we write and speak for the Congressional Record will survive as long as there is a Congressional Record and academicians and scholars, lawyers can search the Congressional Record to understand the environment within which certain actions were taken, certain legislation was passed. Attorneys and judges all rely on the Congressional Record, as well as scholars and academicians and historians and archivists. So the power of the Congressional Record is one that must not be thrown away.

I participated in the hearing and my remarks are included in the panel's report, but the leadership was suggesting that, instead, we needed an independent commission, like the 9/11 Commission. I do not have a problem with an independent commission, but to use the 9/11 Commission as a paragon of an example of how you ferret out the truth and find out what actually happened in a tragic event I think is not appropriately stated. Because yesterday in the Armed Services Committee we had three people who appeared before the Armed Services Committee in an Able Danger hearing. Able Danger is the data mining program that has been in the newspaper a lot because of the persistence of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), one of our colleagues. These experts from the military and from intelligence said that if they had been allowed to do their job, their work product could quite possibly have prevented September 11. It provided the American intelligence community with the tools necessary to understand what was happening to our country in real time, but the program was shut down, and when efforts were made to brief the 9/11 Commission on what this Able Danger work product had demonstrated and had shown, their work was denigrated. Their work product was denigrated, and they were not given an opportunity to present their findings to the Commission as directly.

It has been said in public statements that their work was historically insignificant. Yet we have three people in open session yesterday say to us that if they had been allowed to do their job, to do their work, that quite possibly September 11 could have been prevented. And instead of grasping on to this information, the staff of the 9/11 Commission said that these people were not credible and that the results that they touted were historically insignificant and, therefore, this program was ignored.

Now I do not know why it was ignored, but the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) has had a lot to say about Able Danger and what it meant to our country and why it was shut down. I would encourage people to pay attention to Able Danger and the hearings that the House Armed Services Committee is having.

Also, there was one other thing very sad that came out of the hearing that we had yesterday, and that is poor whistle-blower treatment. In fact, whistle-blower mistreatment and all kinds of allegations were made against average, ordinary Americans who had extraordinary jobs that put them in a position to know something, and because they saw something was wrong and they tried to inform the higher ups that something was wrong, they were personally mistreated at the workplace and away from the workplace, even comments made about their personal and private lives.

What that says to us is that we have got to do a better job in this place of allowing the truth to come out. I remember when I was in Congress during my previous tenure, and at that time we were working very hard on U.S. foreign policy in Africa. We wanted the truth to come out about the real events surrounding the Rwandan genocide. It seemed that everybody who was associated with not telling the truth, or making sure that we didn't get access to the truth, got a promotion.

I have become fond of saying, it seems that it is only in Washington, DC where you can be incompetent and get a promotion. Anywhere else in America, if you are incompetent, you lose your job, but not so here in this country.

As we contemplate the enormity of what the Able Danger panelists told us in open testimony yesterday, as we contemplate as a country the enormity of this revelation, let us also weigh it against what is happening now. What is happening now is that the war drums are beating once again.

I have a constituent who is over the age of 40, and he has been told he has got to report for duty to go to Iraq. Over 40. The drumbeats for war are sounding, not just against Iraq now, but also against Iran and Syria.

In the face of these beating drums, the backdrop is that this administration is being investigated. This administration being investigated has two

ongoing investigations. The Department of Justice just opened another one today, which makes this the third investigation, the third investigation on wiretapping. This administration is being investigated and has drawn indictments and a guilty plea. The Vice President's former chief of staff, Lewis Libby, has been indicted, and Lawrence Franklin, who is being investigated by Paul McNulty, has been sentenced for 12 years for passing classified material over to another country.

This administration is being investigated on how we got into the first war, and now they want us to go to a second war, to open another front on this war. It is about time that we say no more war. No more war, Mr. Bush.

I also want to, as I remember the gentleman in my district who is over 40 years of age who has been told that he has got to report for duty in Iraq, remember Kevin Benderman, whose wife frantically contacted my office asking for help for her husband. Kevin Benderman went to Iraq one time. He was asked to do things that he thought as a human being went against his conscience.

We know that collateral damage is not just a number: 100,000; 200,000. It is people. It is little boys and little girls. It is women. Kevin Benderman said, I am not going to kill innocent people. Don't ask me to do that. I have done it once. Once is too much.

He decided that he would apply for conscientious objector status. Well, Kevin Benderman is in the brig because he did not want to kill innocent little girls and little boys and women and men in Iraq. He is in the brig.

Last weekend, there was an action to free Kevin Benderman. It's a shame.

I didn't expect to take all of my time, but I was pleased that my sister from California chose to come down and say a few words of congratulations to the people of Haiti and to the new President-elect, Rene Preval.

I was clicking around on the computer, and I came across a very interesting article written by Thom Hartmann, and it can be found on Common Dreams at commondreams.org. The title of it is ``Rumsfeld and Cheney Revive Their 70's Terror Playbook.''

Basically what they say in this article, which I am going to submit for the Record, is that when they were in office before, this dynamic duo decided to cook up an idea of Soviet military dominance to frighten the American people and justify huge defense contracts, or the huge defense budget, which then would result in defense contracts.

Let me just read. They said that the Soviets had a new secret weapon of mass destruction. They succeeded in recreating an atmosphere of fear in the United States, and making themselves and their defense contractor friends richer than most of the kingdoms of the world. Trillions of dollars and years later, it was proven that they had been wrong all along, and the CIA had been right. Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz lied to America in the 1970s about Soviet weapons of mass destruction and the Soviet supersub technology.

But the Cold War was good for business and good for the political power of its advocates, from Rumsfeld to Wolfowitz to Cheney, who have all become rich, in part, because of the arms industry.

I am going to place this into the Record, because it appears that America has been through this before.

[From the Common Dreams News Center, Feb. 13, 2006]

Rumsfeld and Cheney Revive Their 70s Terror Playbook

(by Thom Hartmann)

Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney are at it again.

Last week, Rumsfeld told the press we should be preparing

for ``the Long War,'' saying of the war this administration

has stirred up with its attack on Iraq that, ``Just as the

Cold War lasted a long time, this war is something that is

not going to go away.''

The last time Rumsfeld talked like this was in the 1970s,

in response to the danger of peace presented by Richard

Nixon.

In 1972, President Richard Nixon returned from the Soviet

Union with a treaty worked out by Secretary of State Henry

Kissinger, the beginning of a process Kissinger called

``detente.'' On June 1, 1972, Nixon gave a speech in which he

said: ``Last Friday, in Moscow, we witnessed the beginning of

the end of that era which began in 1945. With this step, we

have enhanced the security of both nations. We have begun to

reduce the level of fear, by reducing the causes of fear--for

our two peoples, and for all peoples in the world.''

But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's

Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff

(Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans

might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could

Americans be manipulated? And how could billions of dollars

taken as taxes from average working people be transferred to

the companies that Rumsfeld and Cheney--and their cronies--

would soon work for and/or run?

Rumsfeld and Cheney began a concerted effort--first

secretly and then openly--to undermine Nixon's treaty for

peace and to rebuild the state of fear.

They did it by claiming that the Soviets had a new secret

weapon of mass destruction that the president didn't know

about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody knew about

but them. It was a nuclear submarine technology that was

undetectable by current American technology. And, they said,

because of this and related-undetectable-technology weapons,

the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic

programs and instead give the money to defense contractors

for whom these two men would one day work or have businesses

relationships with.

The CIA strongly disagreed, calling Rumsfeld's position a

``complete fiction'' and pointing out that the Soviet Union

was disintegrating from within, could barely afford to feed

their own people, and would collapse within a decade or two

if simply left alone.

As Dr. Anne Cahn, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from

1977 to 1980, told the BBC's Adam Curtis for his documentary

``The Power of Nightmares'': ``They couldn't say that the

Soviets had acoustic means of picking up American submarines,

because they couldn't find it. So they said, well maybe they

have a non-acoustic means of making our submarine fleet

vulnerable. But there was no evidence that they had a non-

acoustic system. They're saying, `we can't find evidence that

they're doing it the way that everyone thinks they're doing

it, so they must be doing it a different way. We don't know

what that different way is, but they must be doing it.'

``INTERVIEWER (off-camera): Even though there was no

evidence.

``CAHN: Even though there was no evidence.

``INTERVIEWER: So they're saying there, that the fact that

the weapon doesn't exist . . .

``CAHN: Doesn't mean that it doesn't exist It just means

that we haven't found it.''

But Rumsfeld and Cheney wanted Americans to believe there

was something nefarious going on, something we should be very

afraid of. To this end, they convinced President Ford to

appoint a commission including their old friend Paul

Wolfowitz to prove that the Soviets were up to no good.

Wolfowitz's group, known as ``Team B,'' came to the

conclusion that the Soviets had developed several terrifying

new weapons of mass destruction, featuring a nuclear-armed

submarine fleet that used a sonar system that didn't depend

on sound and was, thus, undetectable with our current

technology. It could--within a matter of months--be off the

coast of New York City with a nuclear warhead.

Although Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld's assertions of this

powerful new Soviet WMD was unproven--they said the lack of

proof proved the ``undetectable'' sub existed--they

nonetheless used their charges to push for dramatic

escalations in military spending to selected defense

contractors, a process that continued through the Reagan

administration.

Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz helped re-organized a group--The

Committee on the Present Danger--to promote their worldview.

The Committee produced documentaries, publications, and

provided guests for national talk shows and news reports.

They worked hard to whip up fear and encourage increases in

defense spending, particularly for sophisticated weapons

systems offered by the defense contractors for whom many of

these same men would later become lobbyists.

And they succeeded in recreating an atmosphere of fear in

the United States, and making themselves and their defense

contractor friends richer than most of the kingdoms of the

world.

Trillions of dollars and years later, it was proven that

they had been wrong all along, and the CIA had been right.

Rumsfeld * * * and Wolfowitz lied to America in the 1970s

about Soviet WMDs and the Soviet super-sub technology.

Not only do we now know that the Soviets didn't have any

new and impressive WMDs, but we also now know that the

Soviets were, in fact, decaying from within, ripe for

collapse any time, regardless of what the US did--just as the

CIA (and anybody who visited Soviet states--as I had--during

that time could easily predict). The Soviet economic and

political system wasn't working, and their military was

disintegrating.

But the Cold War was good for business, and good for the

political power of its advocates, from Rumsfeld to Wolfowitz

to Cheney who have all become rich in part because of the

arms industry.

Today, making Americans terrified with their so-called

``War On Terror'' is the same strategy, run for many of the

same reasons, by the same people. And by hyping it--and then

invading Iraq to bring it into fruition--we may well be

bringing into reality forces

that previously existed only on the margins and with very

little power to harm us.

Most recently we've learned from former CIA National

Intelligence Officer for the Middle East and South Asia Paul

Pillar that, just like in the 1970s, the CIA disagreed in

2002 with Rumsfeld and Cheney about an WMD threat--this time

posed by Iraq--even as Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz were

telling America how afraid we should be of an eminent

``mushroom cloud.''

We've seen this movie before. The last time, it cost our

nation hundreds of billions of dollars, vastly enriched the

cronies of these men, and ultimately helped bring Ronald

Reagan to power. This time they've added on top of their

crony enrichment program the burden of over 2200 dead

American servicemen and women, tens of thousands wounded, as

many as a hundred thousand dead Iraqis, and a level of

worldwide instability not seen since the run-up to World War

Two.

When Hillary Clinton recently noted that the only political

card Republicans are any longer capable of playing is the

card of fear, she was spot-on right. They're now even running

radio and TV commercials designed to terrorize our children

(``Do you have a plan for a terrorist attack?''), the modern

reincarnation of ``Duck and Cover.''

Now that former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has

confessed that many of the terror alerts that continually

popped up during the 2004 election campaign were, as USA

Today noted on 10 May 2005, based on ``flimsy evidence'' or

were done over his objection at the insistence of

``administration officials,'' it's increasingly clear that

the Bush administration itself is the source of much of the

``be afraid!'' terror inflicted on US citizens over the past

5 years.

It's time for patriotic Americans of all political

affiliations, and for our media, to join with Senator

Clinton, former CIA official Paul Pillar, and the many others

who are pointing this out, and refuse to allow the Bush

administration to inflict terror on Americans--and the

world--for political gain.

As Franklin D. Roosevelt said in his first inaugural

address in 1932, when Americans were terrorized by the

Republican Great Depression, the echoes of World War One, and

the rise of Communism in Russia: This is preeminently the

time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly.

Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our

country today. This great Nation will endure as it has

endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let

me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear

is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror

which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into

advance.

Indeed, the best hope for the growth of democracy around

the world and the survival of individual liberty in the

United States is for us to turn away from Rumsfeld's and

Cheney's politics of terror and fear, and once again embrace

the great vision of this nation, held by her great statesmen

and women from 1776 to today. Indeed, they are still among

us, as we saw most recently when a brave few senators stood

up to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito.

In this election year, we must redouble our efforts to

swell their ranks, to involve ourselves in local and national

political groups, and to return America to her destiny as the

world's beacon of courage, liberty, and light.

Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Conaway.) The gentlewoman will suspend. The gentlewoman is reminded to refrain from personalities toward the Vice President.

Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman is not suggesting that I cannot say the name of the Vice President. I am reading an article. Is the gentleman suggesting?

I did not make a personal reference, so I will move on with my time. I would commend this article to this Congress: ``Rumsfeld and Cheney Revive Their 70's Terror Playbook,'' and everything I have said is quoted right here in this article. Now, I think the last thing this Congress wants to do is try to snuff out the right of people to speak.

The next thing I would like to draw to your attention is an excerpt from a book. The name of the book is ``War is a Racket.'' It is written by Major General Smedley Butler, and this is how it goes:

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the very many. Out of war, a few people make huge fortunes.

In the world war, because this was written at the time of World War I, a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the world war. That many admitted to their huge blood gains in their income tax returns.

How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns, no one knows. How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dugout? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up by a few. Munitions makers, bankers, ship builders, manufacturers, meat packers, speculators, they would fare well. Yes, they are getting ready for another war. Why shouldn't they? It pays high dividends. But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers, their sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children? What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits? Yes, what does it profit the Nation?

But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill. If you don't believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad, or visit any of the veterans hospitals in the United States where there are thousands of the living dead. The very able chief surgeon told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home. Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks.

There they were remolded. They were made over. They were made to about face, to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and through mass psychology they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.

Then, suddenly, we discharge them and told them to make another about face. This time they had to do their own readjustment, without mass psychology, without officers aid and advice and without nationwide propaganda. We did not need them anymore, so we scattered them about without any speeches or parades.

Too many of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed mentally because they could not make the final about face alone. In the government hospitals, these boys are in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys do not even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces. Physically, they are in good shape. Mentally, they are gone. There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. Another step is necessary in this fight to smash the war racket.

To summarize, three steps must be taken to smash the war racket. One, we must take the profit out of war. Two, we must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war. And three, we must limit our military forces to defense purposes. He says home defense purposes. This is an excerpt from Smedley Butler's War is a Racket.

Now, juxtapose what this man of war said to the drumbeats of war that we hear in our media now, that are emanating from high places within this administration, people who have not borne the rifle, who have not been in war. In fact, when America called them because America needed them, they were full of deferments. And yet they want to put a young man like Kevin Benderman who does not want to kill children and women and innocent people in Iraq anymore in the brig, and they would tell our country that we need to prepare for a long war. We do

not prepare for a long war. Certainly not George Bush's war. And if Tom Hartman is right in his assessment, we do not need to prepare for Dick Cheney's war either.

We have had some discussion in this body about war, and one of my colleagues from Pennsylvania did what Major General Smedley Butler said we ought to do. He visited the young men and women who have been asked to fight this war, who are on the front lines of Donald Rumsfeld's long war. There he was compelled to make a change, a change in his conviction, that perhaps this is not the right war for America; and he came back to this Congress and he said so. I am talking about my colleague from Pennsylvania, Mr. Murtha.

We need to really think about where we are as a country. We need to think about who we are as a country, as Americans. What does it mean to be an American?

Look at the people of Haiti who have nothing but their hopes and aspirations in democracy. And despite dictatorship and coup d'etat and dictatorship and coup d'etat again, they went to the polls and they demanded that their votes be counted.

We, too, have, in this country, the opportunity to express ourselves at the ballot box. The way I stand here is the way all 535 Members of Congress stand here, because people choose to participate or people choose not to.

In my case, I was put out of Congress because I spoke up about September 11. And the people of the Fourth Congressional District of Georgia said, we are not going to stand for that, and they sent me back, showing the power of the vote, as the people of Haiti have demonstrated to the world the power of the vote. I would hope all Americans would value the power of the vote and exercise it.

Mr. Speaker, when I first heard the news this morning I was at once both shocked and saddened. Although Mrs. King belonged to her children and cousins and nieces and nephews, she also belonged to us--the American people and the family of black people all over the world.

When she was alive, there was a sense of comfort. Mother King guarded us, protected us; she helped set this country free when she picked up Martin's cross.

I was given the privilege of speaking at this year's Martin Luther King ceremony at Ebenezer Church. Due to illness, she watched the proceedings on the television, not able to be there with us. Our love went out to her then and it does so now. I love the King Family as do we all. Her vision and Martin's vision moved our country forward.

In 1963 Dr. King spoke of Stone Mountain, Georgia. I now represent Stone Mountain, Georgia. Change is possible in our country. It is possible for people of conscience to come together and move this country forward.

What Mrs. King embodies will not be extinguished. She is our Queen Mother. And we should spend this day reflecting on her life, her legacy, her spirit, and what we will do in our lives to further Martin and Coretta's vision for our beloved community.

My condolences to all the members of the King family; and to Martin III, Yolanda, Dexter, and Bernice.

In every sense of the word, they were our first family and now we look to the children to wear the family's mantle.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my condolences to Martin King, III, Yolanda, Dexter, and Bernice King, and to the entire King family.

I was shocked and saddened this morning when I heard the news as well. I had the opportunity to speak this year at the Martin Luther King ceremonies held annually at Ebenezer Church. And for the first time in many, many years, our queen mother, Ms. Coretta Scott King, was not there with us personally at the church, but she was looking at the proceedings and the ceremony on television.

One thing is fairly clear from the proceedings of the House today, and that is that the King family is loved by this body, by these Members, by the American people, by the African American community in particular, and the progressive community in general because it was the King family and their sacrifices that moved our country forward. They moved America forward. And so, I am so proud to represent Stone Mountain, Georgia, that same Stone Mountain, Georgia, that Dr. King spoke of in 1963, but today it is represented by an African American Congresswoman. It is represented by me.

This country can change. This country's leaders can change. This country can raise to its highest ideals if we have the will to do so. And Dr. King and Mrs. King and the King family continue to shine the light on America finding that will to do the best that it can do, to be the best that it can be.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from the U.S. Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

(Mrs. CHRISTENSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support a bill that is close to my heart as well as the hearts of many others in the 4th Congressional District of Georgia. That is, H.R. 2099, the Arabia Mountain National Heritage Area Act. It would establish Arabia Mountain as a National Heritage Area, a recognition that is long overdue.

Arabia Mountain, a hidden treasure in its own right, is a place where natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources are intricately woven together to form an interconnected, nationally unique landscape. A true Georgia treasure--and an American one, too.

Arabia Mountain spans 4,000 acres and three counties.

Arabia Mountain is part of an area in eastern Metropolitan Atlanta that has been linked to human settlement and activity for thousands of years. This area not only includes the mountain, but also lakes, rivers, quarries, marked trails, and farmland in the surrounding area.

The history of human settlement in this region is intimately connected to its geological resources, starting over 7,000 years ago with the quarrying and trading of soapstone. Not only is this home for deer, beavers, and other animals but a place where everyday people can find peace and get away from the hustle and bustle of urban sprawl and enjoy a piece of America's true beauty.

Arabia Mountain is home to plants that only can be found on the mountain. Arabia Mountain is truly a national heritage area.

Arabia Mountain is also a place where families can come together to take a hike, be a part of a class, and even enjoy a cookout. We are in the midst of a season that causes us to remember the most important things in our lives--family.

Family, Mr. Speaker, is what Arabia Mountain is about. It is a place where you can watch the sunset with someone you love, photograph unique flora, discover Georgia's lizards with your child, or blowout her candles at a birthday party. I invite my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote yes on H.R. 2099, the Arabia Mountain National Heritage Area Act. Arabia Mountain is, indeed, a genuine American beauty.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Georgia Senators Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson for their support; Georgia's Department of Natural Resources for its valuable input; my colleagues David Scott and Jim Marshall for cosponsoring this bill; and my staff for preparing this

bill and helping it get to the Floor of the House today. I'd especially like to thank Congressman Pombo, Chairman of the House Resources Committee and his staff and Nick Rahall, its Ranking Member, and his staff, for their advice and counsel as this bill went through the legislative process in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I support the extension of the Defense Department's program ensuring that its Federal contracting process in no way supports or subsidizes the discrimination that has long been a problem in the contracting business. The extension of the program through September 2009 is needed to help achieve that goal.

Congress has learned a great deal about the effects of discrimination in denying contracting opportunities for minority-owned businesses. The ugly reality is that contracting has long been dominated by ``old-boy'' networks that make it very difficult for African Americans, Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans to participate fairly in these opportunities, or even obtain information about them.

Years of Congressional hearings have shown that minorities historically have been excluded from both public and private construction contracts in general, and from Federal defense contracts in particular. Since its adoption, the Defense Department program, called the 1207 program, has helped level the playing field for minority contractors. But there is still more to do, as the additional information we have received since the program was last reauthorized makes clear.

Ever since the program was first adopted in 1986, racial and ethnic discrimination--both overt and subtle--have continued to erect significant barriers to minority participation in federal contracting. In cases, overt discrimination has prevented minority-owned businesses from obtaining needed loans and bonds. Prime contractors, unions, and suppliers of goods and materials have preferred to do business with white contractors rather than with minority firms.

These problems affect a wide variety of areas in which the Department offers contracts, and the problems are detailed in many recent disparity studies, including:

City of Dallas Availability and Disparity Study, Mason Tillman Associates, Ltd. (2002);

City of Cincinnati Disparity Study, Griffin & Strong, P.C. (2002);

Ohio Multi-Jurisdictional Disparity Studies, Mason Tillman Associates, Ltd. (2003);

Procurement Disparity Study of the Commonwealth of Virginia, MGT of America, Inc. (2004);

Alameda County Availability Study, Mason Tillman Associates (2004);

City of New York Disparity Study, Mason Tillman Associates, Ltd. (2005).

The 1207 program helps to correct these problems of discrimination without imposing an undue burden on white-owned businesses. Small businesses owned by white contractors are eligible to receive the benefits of the program if they are socially or economically disadvantaged.

All of us benefit when recipients of federal opportunities reflect America's diversity, and I'm proud to support the reauthorization of the 1207 program.