Mr. Chairman, I am touched by the endorsement of the Republican chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the Clinton policy in this regard, but I have to disagree with it. In fact, we are being told a couple of unbelievable things. Essentially we are being told that the collapse of the Soviet Union means that there is no opportunity to save money in intelligence. We are told there is, after all, Iraq and Iran and Libya. I agree. I disagree with the implicit assumption that there was no Iraq in 1986, that Libya was created in 1983, and that Iran just floated down. All of those other threats were there at the same time. Ten years ago we were dealing with the terrorist threats in Syria, in Iraq, and Libya. Those were not the Andrews sisters a few years ago who suddenly turned ugly on us. Those countries and the threats they projected were a fact 10 years ago. We also had, as the primary focus of our national security expenditure, a Soviet Union which led an unwilling empire of many other nations that were being held captive, that threatened our very existence. Yes, there are problems in the world today. There are people who run countries today who in a good world would not even be allowed to drive cars. They mean us harm and we need to defend ourselves.
On the recordSeptember 7, 1995
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Debating intelligence funding and national security threats in the post-Soviet era.
Share
More from Barney Frank
Apr 5, 2017
I urge staff to pay close attention to the differences in products offered by nonbank institutions and to be mindful of Congress's intent in financial reform that State consumer protection laws be preserved to the extent possible.
Oct 21, 2019
I think it is clear that Fannie and Freddie are sufficiently secure so they are in no great danger.
Jul 11, 2016
The Supreme Court says we have a right to be married. There is no Federal legislation and in many States no other legislation that protects us against discrimination.
Jan 9, 2024
Barney Frank said that he believed that it was a war on crypto that motivated this--not a systemic risk of crypto.





