---

Hon. Patrick J. Murphy
Of Pennsylvania
In The House Of Representatives
Thursday, June 21, 2007

Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania: Madam Speaker, I rise today to talk about the continued need for accountability in the war on terror. I support the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, but must register my concerns about the money we pledge to send to Pakistan.

Clear rules and accountability are vital to winning the war on terror. Just as we attach benchmarks and set goals for the money the United States sends to Iraq and Afghanistan, we must do the same for Pakistan--especially if Pakistan is to continue as a true partner in this fight.

While Iraq continues to smolder, Osama bin Laden--the murderer of more than 3,000 innocent Americans is still at large. President Bush said at a press conference 5 years ago, that he "didn't spend much time on him."

Recently, when asked why bin Laden hadn't been brought to justice yet he said: "Why is he still at large? Because we haven't got him yet . . . That's why. And he's hiding, and we're looking, and we will continue to look until we bring him to justice."

This is not good enough.

Meanwhile, the Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan and American commanders on the ground are asking for more troops to fight terror, hunt down al Qaeda and kill Osama bin Laden.

Madam Speaker, we need to win the war on terror--and that means hunting down bin Laden and al Qaeda wherever they are. That means-- above all else--success in Afghanistan.

Our troops over there are doing an amazing job and they deserve our continued support. It is getting harder for them, especially along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan--and in some of the areas where we believe bin Laden is still at large.

I have always said that we needed to be tough and smart in fighting the war on terror. That means asking tough questions--even of our friends. One question that needs to be asked--especially as we prepare to send them $300 million dollars--is about Pakistan's President Musharraf.

Right now we can count President Musharraf as an ally but is he doing all he can to hunt bin Laden? We cannot afford to let a mass murderer slip through our fingers again.

The U.S. has sent $5.6 billion in military reimbursements to Pakistan for counterterrorism efforts--this is $80 million a month. We are about to vote to send them even more.

In the early days of the war in Afghanistan, President Bush decided to out-source the hunt for bin Laden in Tora Bora. Now we need to examine--are we relying too much on Pakistan and their accord with tribal warlords near the Afghan border for the same reason?

Why do we, the United States of America, continue to send roughly $1 billion per year to Pakistan if they are going to slash patrols through the area where al Qaeda and Taliban fighters are most active?

Why, as Senator Reed has said, are we reimbursing Pakistan for their efforts instead of, "paying for specific objectives?"

Is it true, as two American analysts and one American soldier reported--that Pakistani security forces fired in direct support of Taliban ground attacks on Afghan Army posts?

Families in the 8th District of Pennsylvania voted me here to ask tough questions and demand accountability.

I hope over the coming weeks and months this Congress gets answers to these vital questions so we can effectively prosecute the war on terror.

We can win the war on terror but after more than 4 years in Iraq and nearly 6 years in Afghanistan, we need to demand more results.

Madam Speaker, by asking the tough questions we can continue to support the troops who are fighting bravely to secure our Nation.

---

The Speaker pro tempore: Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. Sestak: Mr. Speaker, a little over 5 years ago I was on the ground in Afghanistan and then returned with an Aircraft Carrier Battle Group. I then took that Aircraft Carrier Battle Group into the Persian Gulf for the precursor operations just before we began that war.

After that war had commenced, I returned to the ground in Afghanistan 18 months later for a short period of time and saw what had not been done. We had accomplished so little compared to what might have been because we diverted our attention and our resources from our Civil Affairs Forces to our Special Operations Forces to the tragic misadventure in Iraq.

I speak of Afghanistan because as it becomes prey to terrorists and as the Taliban has moved back into the southern provinces, it is a poster child for why I believe we must bring about a timetable for the end of the war in Iraq.

That war has hurt U.S. security throughout this globe as well as here at home, yet not one Army unit, Active, Reserve or Guard is in a state of readiness that it could deploy anywhere in the world if another contingency were to occur. Never mind that we are failing to engage properly from the Western Pacific to Southeast Asia to the Middle East.

There is a change in our strategy that can bring about an end to this tragedy without a failed state in Iraq. That is to set a date that is certain by which we would redeploy out of Iraq, because a date certain changes the structure of incentives within that region to change the behavior of other nations, in particular, Iran and Syria, that are involved destructively in this conflict because we are, to their delight, bleeding, bleeding profusely.

I asked when I was there with Senator Hagel, our highest political officer there, does Iran want a failed state if we are to redeploy? His response was no. Therefore, we must have the confidence to set a date that is certain to redeploy out of Iraq, put our troops in Afghanistan, remain in the region on our bases in Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, or Aircraft Carrier Battle Group or Amphibious Ready Group, and bring others home, so we don't degrade the readiness of our forces, but have the competence to deal with Iran and Syria, bring them together with the Iraqis as they deal with the extreme elements and we deal with the middle.

There is a saying in the Middle East, "Insha'Allah," basically, "God willing tomorrow." Tomorrow for U.S. security has been enough. A date certain, approximately a year, 9 months, to give those countries time to work with us to bring about the political decisions that must cease the civil war, to have the Iraqis step to the plate and assume responsibility in the 32 ministries that thus far have been personal fiefdoms for personal ambitions as we provide the political and military cover for them to go about their personal pursuits. This is a change that can only about be brought about not by doubling down on a bad military bet by more troops, but by enforcing a date certain within a timetable. And lastly, we should do so on an authorization bill.

We should never again put our troops between us and the President. Being in the military is a dangerous business, but it doesn't have to be unsafe. Our business in the military has the dignity of danger, but you must provide them the bullets and the equipment they need to protect themselves, while having an authorization bill provide the date certain by which no forces in Iraq would remain, or funding for them to remain would not be there.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the remainder of my time with the understanding that there is a strategic approach to end this conflict without a failed state in order to enhance U.S. security.

---

The Speaker pro tempore: Under a previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Ms. Woolsey: Mr. Speaker, in the current issue of the "New Yorker" magazine, veteran reporter Seymour Hersh lays out the shame that was Abu Ghraib and the efforts at the highest levels to sweep it under the carpet.

Former Army General Antonio Taguba takes this very brave step to share details of his meetings with former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other administration officials in the wake of the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. In May, 2004, photos of abuse at the American-run prison were made public by CBS and other media outlets. We can all recall the inhumane treatment and degradation depicted. What was included in the photos and videos were not interrogations. They were humiliating and often horrible acts of violence.

Months earlier, before the photos emerged, General Taguba had filed a report outlining the "numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses that were inflicted on several detainees and systemic and illegal abuse."

In fact, the first report sent to senior Pentagon officials came in January of that year. The response? A senior general in Iraq brushed off the report saying that the victims were "only Iraqis." According to the article, General Taguba found that Lieutenant General Sanchez, the Army commander in Iraq who had visited the prison several times, knew exactly what was going on.

Despite many reports contradicting him, Secretary Rumsfeld himself clung to the claim that he saw the photos and video of the abuse only days before testifying before Congress. He said he first learned of the problem in late January or early February. His memory seems to be a little fuzzy in this regard. And in response, who did he send to oversee prison in Iraq? Major General Jeffrey Miller, the commander at Guantanamo.

If this were a movie plot, Mr. Speaker, it would seem ludicrous. Unfortunately, this is part of our real history in the occupation of Iraq.

And our commander-in-chief? It is unclear when he first learned of the situation at Abu Ghraib, but by most accounts it was months before the notorious pictures hit the airwaves. This is absolutely disgraceful.

It appears that the administration has no shame when it comes to the continuing abuse of human rights abroad and at home right here in America. Is this the legacy we want to leave in the Middle East? A preemptive strike against a nation which did not have weapons of mass destruction? A civil war that is tearing a nation apart? Our standing in the world at an all-time low? The loss of over 3,500 brave service members?

This did not have to happen. The administration willingly misled this Nation into an occupation that cannot be won.

The acts at Abu Ghraib could have besmirched the honor and reputation of all of the troops who serve each day with distinction and courage, but thankfully it did not, because the American people know and understand that the acts of the few and of the top leadership who endorse those acts should not be visited on those who so bravely and selflessly serve. Our troops have shown great valor in the face of unbelievable challenges. This Congress honors them and the sacrifices they have made.

That said, it is well past time that this Congress stands up and says, enough is enough from this administration. The American people are frustrated with the lack of progress on ending the occupation and bringing our troops home, and rightfully so.

This fight may be difficult, but it is our obligation. I ask my colleagues to demand that not another day goes by without a real effort to bring our troops home and to return the sovereignty of Iraq to its people.

---