Melvin Watt: “during consideration of the rule this morning, our Republican colleagues suggested something pretty revolutionary, that…”

“during consideration of the rule this morning, our Republican colleagues suggested something pretty revolutionary, that is, that we do something we do not normally do often around here, and that is read the resolution. They said they encouraged us to review it, and vote based on whether we agree or disagree with the content of the resolution. So I reviewed the resolution. And as our colleagues suggested, I intend to vote against it based on the fact that there are several things in the resolution that I strongly disagree with. First, on page 2 of the resolution, it states as follows: ``Whereas by early 2003, Saddam Hussein and his criminal Ba'athist regime in Iraq constituted a threat to global peace and security.'' I think the only way one could conclude this would be to conclude that there were, in fact, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I did not vote for the war resolution because I never believed the President when he asserted that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in the first place. I did not believe it then. It was subsequently proven not to be the case. And I most certainly cannot support a resolution that asserts it now. Second, the resolution asserts that: ``The terrorists seek to destroy the new unity government because it threatens the terrorist's aspirations for Iraq and the broader Middle East.'' There is probably some truth to that.…”