国会记录：2004年2月3日（众议院）第H282-H283页伊拉克情报局宣布临时发言人失效。根据众议院先前的一项命令，来自得克萨斯州的淑女（杰克逊·李女士）被承认5分钟。德克萨斯州的JACKSON-LEE女士。议长先生，这个国家的祝福是我们是一个共和国，一个宪政共和国，开国元勋们明智地建立了三个不同的政府部门。我非常认真地对待这一区别和宪法授权，并认为国会立法部门有责任监督行政部门，因为司法部门仍然是一个独立的组成部分。这个政府的行政部门在2002年秋天进行了一场辩论，向美国人民暗示我们即将受到伊拉克的袭击。这是一场激烈的辩论。如果你愿意的话，对政府的事实有很大的挑战；他们发起了一场非常公开的运动，如果你愿意的话，就是要说服美国人民，让美国国会相信我们即将受到袭击。这是一场严肃的竞选，议长先生；这是我们历史上一个严肃的时刻。国会议员非常认真地对待这场辩论。我清楚地记得，在这座房子的地板上，巨大的情感，关于我们是否应该开战的巨大犹豫不决、犹豫不决、巨大的关切和冲突，总统提到的话和2003年冬天最终提到的邪恶轴心是否真的是事实；但政府对此深信不疑。他们把情报界推到了向我们所有人表明这些信息是真实的地步。让我和我的同事们分享一下政府的话：“简单地说，毫无疑问，萨达姆·侯赛因现在拥有大规模杀伤性武器，”副总统迪克·切尼，2002年8月26日``布什总统2002年9月12日说：“现在，伊拉克正在扩大和改进用于生产生物武器的设施。”``伊拉克政权拥有并生产化学和生物武器。“它正在寻求核武器”，布什，2002年10月7日``我们还通过情报发现，伊拉克有越来越多的有人和无人驾驶飞行器，将用于在广大地区部署化学和生物武器。“我们担心伊拉克正在探索使用无人机执行针对美国的任务的方法”，布什，2002年10月7日``白宫发言人阿里·弗莱舍（Ari Fleisher）2003年1月9日说：“我们知道那里有武器。”``证据表明，伊拉克正在重新考虑其核武器计划。萨达姆·侯赛因和伊拉克核科学家举行了多次会议，他称之为他的核圣战者，他的核圣战者。2002年10月7日，布什说：“卫星照片显示，伊拉克正在重建其过去核计划中的设施。”。议长先生，在接下来的几天里，我将提出2004年《保护美国国家安全法》，2004年《保护美国国家安全法》。就是要求国土安全专责委员会,司法委员会,武装部队委员会,情报常设专责委员会在国会举行听证会,绝对要求对用来说服国会的情报水平问题进行调查,，参众两院都支持发动战争的决定。我反对总统提出的两党委员会。为什么？因为总统将做出任命，不管他们是民主党人还是共和党人。总统、政府和行政部门将确定开始和完成工作的时间。我感到关切的是，在作出开战决定时所提供的关于情报类型问题的任何报告和任何调查都会受到质疑，这是美国国会的监督。我拒绝让国会放弃宪法赋予它的职责，对所提供的情报是否合法、是否实质以及所依据的问题进行监督。对美国公众来说，你应该得到一个答案。对美国公众来说，你应该让你的国会代表参与到一个过程中来，调查那些没有时间规定、没有终点规定的地方，调查的对象正是提交情报的执行官。另外,我们要抓紧这个报道。此报告应在6个月内完成，因为它具有时间敏感性。为什么它对时间很敏感，议长先生？因为情报是美国安全的基础设施。它决定了我们如何保护我们的边界，它决定了航空安全，它决定了我们提出的不同或不同级别的警报se day after day after day. It is crucial that the Congress rises to the level of oversight. It is interesting that we wish to push this very important work off to a civilian, if you will, commission which the very entity that we are investigating will be the one that will select both the participants and the procedures. Congress needs to use its subpoena powers and its investigatory powers in order to ensure that the American people have the truth. I ask my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to join me in co-sponsoring the Protect America's National Security Act of 2004, which will ask for the general numbers of the CIA budget so that we will know, as was suggested by a former Reagan administration official. I would like to thank my colleagues for taking the time to speak out tonight about this issue that is critical to the long-term survival of our Nation. I do not mean to use hyperbole. However, I truly believe that so much rides on our foreign intelligence gathering system. Our foreign policy, our trade policies, how we run our borders, what level of alert we are at, how we should live our day-to-day lives--it all is based on our understanding of what is happening in the world around us. If we are continually making decisions based on false assumptions and wrong interpretations, we could face a future full of 9/11s and unnecessary wars like the one still raging in Iraq today. In the run-up to war, top Administration officials, and the President himself, were making statements daily about the deadly weapons that Saddam Hussein was pointing at the American people. We heard that they had stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. We heard they were trying to buy materials for nuclear weapons; they had mobile weapons labs, and programs to develop more. One by one, these claims have been refuted. Last week, we heard Dr. David Kay, our own chief weapons inspector for the past year, testify that those claims were false. However, we went to war based mostly on those claims. The war that has taken the lives of more than 500 brave U.S. soldiers, killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, and diminished our standing in the world community. We have to find [[Page H283]] out how this tragedy occurred, and make sure it doesn't happen again. The American people are calling for answers, and we need them urgently. On Friday, the President declared that he wants answers too. I commend him for that, but I am concerned that no matter how well-intentioned he is--the truth will not come out of his Administration. I am worried that a commission hand-picked by the executive branch, with an agenda and schedule crafted by the executive branch, will be incapable of producing an objective and useful assessment of executive branch failures. It is a fundamental human trait that groups tend to close ranks to shield themselves from scrutiny when they know they have made mistakes. That is why the framers of the Constitution built a system of checks and balances into our great government. The President has the power to veto any law Congress passes, and in return, Congress has a strict duty of oversight over the executive branch and the Agencies. It would be a gross dereliction of our duties, if Congress sits idly by and assumes that the Administration will take care of this problem. In fact, we have already seen that the President's Commission is getting off on the wrong foot. We are getting reports that it is too broad in scope, and may not yield any answers until next year. That is unacceptable. Our national security depends on reliable intelligence information. Furthermore, the President has stated that we are in a global ``War on Terror.'' we have soldiers on the ground around the world fighting that war. They, their families, and the American people, deserve to know what they are fighting for, and what dangers they may face. We simply don't have months or years to waste before we get around to fixing our intelligence-gathering system. We may be vulnerable now, so we cannot rest until we address this problem. Congressional leadership should immediately launch a series of full and comprehensive hearings, including Homeland Security, Judiciary, Armed Services, and Intel Committees from both the House and Senate. Within six months, we need to report back to the American people how the Administration could have been so far off the mark on Iraqi weapons. We must learn from that mistake first. After that, we can move on to broader issues. None of us knows what a real investigation will yield. It will take hard work to fully understand the function of our intelligence gathering agencies, since they are largely secret from the American people, and most Members of Congress. Even simple questions like, ``Are we putting enough money into Intel?'' is tough to answer since the CIA budget is top secret. I think we need to take a look at that policy. Funding of special programs should obviously be guarded. However, I think maybe the American people should have a general idea of how much we are spending on intelligence gathering, in total. Only then can they decide if they are getting their money's worth. But more important then the financing is the functionality. Do we have adequate manpower? Do we have reliable data? Are we interpreting that data properly? Have we compromised our analysis by poisoning it with politics and partisanship? The American people deserve answers. This isn't about politics; it is about prudence. ____________________