In a message dated 10/10/2002 1:24:10 PM , [log in to unmask] writes:


> Subj:CONGRESSWOMAN MAXINE WATERS
>
> Nationwide, it looks as if we need to help our Congress focus on domestic
> agendas.  Let's connect our spirits and bring it home!
>
> Tammy Lee
> Reparations Queen LA
> <A HREF="http://www.kwanzaapeopleofcolor.com/">http://www.kwanzaapeopleofcolor.com</A>
> (323) 296-1532
>
> Statement
> H. RES. 114, Authorization For Use of
> Military Force Against Iraq Resolution
> Congresswoman Maxine Waters
> Tuesday, October 08, 2002
>
> Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne)
> for yielding me time; and I commend him on the tremendous work that he does
> in this Congress dealing with the many complicated problems of foreign
> relations. I thank him for the time that he is allocating to me this
> evening.
>
> Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution which would authorize the
> President to use unilateral military force against Iraq.
>
> Mr. Speaker, I do not believe the President has provided sufficient
> evidence to conclude that Saddam Hussein currently possesses significant
> quantities of weapons of mass destruction. Although I am aware that weapons
> inspectors found significant amounts of chemical and biological weapons in
> Iraq between 1991 and 1998, those materials have been destroyed. Since that
> date, there have been allegations of a growing arsenal of chemical and
> biological weapons, but there is to date no credible evidence of such an
> arsenal's existence.
>
> Even if Saddam Hussein does possess weapons of mass destruction, Iraq does
> not represent an imminent threat to the United States of America. There is
> simply no evidence connecting Saddam Hussein with the 9-11 terrorist
> attacks. There is also no evidence to indicate that Saddam Hussein has ever
> given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups.
>
> Furthermore, Iraq is 6,000 miles away from the United States and the Iraqi
> regime lacks the capability to strike the United States from within its own
> borders.
>
> The ultimate weapons of mass destruction are nuclear weapons. If
> administration officials are really concerned about other countries having
> weapons of mass destruction, they should turn their attention to Russia,
> China, India, Pakistan, and Israel, all of which are known to possess
> nuclear weapons.
>
> No one doubts that Saddam Hussein is a potential threat to his neighbors in
> the Middle East. He has attacked them in the past, and certainly he could
> do it again. However, Saddam Hussein's neighbors do not support military
> action against Iraq at this time, and it would be diplomatically and
> militarily unwise for the United States to initiate a war in the Middle
> East without the support and participation of a coalition of countries in
> the region.
>
> If administration officials are concerned about countries that support
> terrorism, perhaps they should turn their attention to our friend and ally,
> the most undemocratic country, Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has been
> financing extremist Islamist madrassahs in Pakistan and other Islamic
> countries. These madrassahs, or schools, teach young boys an extreme
> interpretation of Islam, combined with a support for terrorism and hatred
> for America. But they are our friends, and I do not see talk or discussion
> from this administration about trying to bring about democracy in Saudi
> Arabia, or being concerned about the financing of the madrassahs and the
> things they have been doing for so very long.
>
> The human and economic cost of a war on Iraq are completely unjustified. It
> has been estimated that a war on Iraq would cost between $100 and $200
> billion. This would come at a time when we are already spending billions of
> dollars to wage a war against terrorism in Afghanistan. A war on Iraq could
> lead to the deaths of thousands of innocent citizens in Iraq and unknown
> numbers of American servicemen and women.
>
> Mr. Speaker, we would like the President to finish the war on terrorism.
> While we have had some success in Afghanistan, we still have not located
> Osama bin Laden. Our servicemen have been fired on in Afghanistan every
> day, and they are all set to assassinate the President or the leader that
> we have supported in Afghanistan, and it could happen at any time.
>
> I am deeply concerned that a unilateral war on Iraq would make Americans
> more vulnerable to terrorist attacks at home. A unilateral war on Iraq
> could lead to an increase in anti-American extremism throughout the Muslim
> world. This could destabilize countries in the Middle East and South Asia.
> It could also provide al Qaeda with an opportunity to recruit additional
> terrorists within these countries.
>
> Al Qaeda is America's greatest enemy. We should be focusing our efforts on
> confronting the al Qaeda threat, while encouraging the people of the Middle
> East and South Asia to support democracy and oppose terrorism.
>
> Instead of authorizing a unilateral war, Congress should support the
> efforts of the United Nations to resume weapons inspections in Iraq. The
> resumption of weapons inspections would allow us to determine whether
> Saddam Hussein has the weapons of mass destruction that the Bush
> administration claims he has. Working with the United Nations would also
> illustrate to our allies and people throughout the Muslim world that the
> United States respects the rule of law and considers war a last resort.
>
> I urge Members to oppose unilateral use of America's Armed Forces and give
> United Nations weapons inspectors an opportunity to do their work. I urge
> my colleagues to oppose this resolution.
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~