|
喬’’J’米切爾 (GEORGE J. MITCHELL) ’伊’’反對’問’聽證’’’講話 The Iran－Contra Hearings’雖’我們’’懇’’’支援’國’策略’’’’不’麼做’ ’個’交’策問’’’’’’陷’’境’第’’’’’’’’’’國’中’’’質獲釋’第’’它’援’尼’’瓜左’’’諾’’’’’反對’(簡稱"反對’")’’’’’不’’’質’贖’’’’它’公’’’不’’’分’談’’它’不’公’支援反對’’’’國’’1984’停止’對’們’資’’’’’’’’個’’’劃’把’器’售給伊’’’望伊’’用’’’讓’國’質獲釋’’’’’把’器’售’動引’對反對’’支援’ ’’伊’’反對’問’’’’’奧’弗’諾斯中’’’’國’’’’Ⅸ’’’實’’’’’’1987’’諾斯’國’聽證’’’證’’’’’’動’’’稱’種’動’’’’’’’’’國動機’ 1987’7月13日’喬’’J’米切爾(1933 ’ )’諾斯中’’論’’眾傳播’介’’國’’’’集中’聽證’’’而米切爾參議Ⅸ給’國’民’’有關公民學’’課’ 諾斯中’’’’’’’’’有辭’談論’尼’’瓜實’民’’必’’’對’’’’們’有異議’’對’’’’最’方式’’’’目標’’’’著’議’ ’’’贊’’統’’策’’’’反對’ ’’’’反對’產’’’’滿’’國熱忱’’國’’’’有’種’’’方式’’’’’諾’’’’’尼’’瓜實’民’’給中’’’’’平’ ’’’國’’國公民擔心’當我們’國’’’民’’’’’’’國內’’’少’’’民’’ ’’’’’’’極’’’我們’’策’’’’’’曾說’假’我們’’不’’’我們’盟國’’’’’國’’對我們’’’’’示’疑’ ’種擔心’’’實’’’’’’’說改變’策’’’’那麼’’採用’種不’’’策’’公’’’’種’策’’中’反’’而’之’’’’不’’’ ’難’’’有比’種做’’’’’矛’’’’’難’像有什麼比陰’’陽’’’做’’我們’盟國’有’由’’我們’不’’ 而’售’器給伊’’’釋’’質’交換條件’’正’’種做’’ 關’’國’’’對我國’熱’’’’說’’’’ ’’數國’’源’單’’部落’單’’種族’’們’’單’’’教’’’’種族’’種’’教傳統’’’國’之’’成’國’’粘’劑’ ’’國’不’’我們有’種種族’’種’教’’個’有限’’’傳統’我們’國’國’粘’劑’關’個’’由’公平’’國’’’ ’’’’我國’’’關鍵問’’’’’最偉’’均衡器’’’’’國’’’面’’’平等’ ’’’及’’’我們’不’’用目’’手’’’’不論目’’麼重’’’麼’高’’’疑國’’民’’重’而’’高’’’都不’’’’我國’’’’’價’’’’ ’談’’’’歷’’實’’’’欽’’顯’’’’國’民’’’’引’原’之’’ 讓我’’’我’’’歷中’’個’’’ ’我’’參議’之’’我有’擔任’邦’’’’那個職’’’我擁有’’’’’’我最樂’’’’’’’讓’們成’’國公民’ 我’次’’次’’我們稱’’’國’’儀式’’公民儀式’ ’’’’止’’’’’’止’’我’生中做’’最’動’心’’情’ ’種儀式’終讓我’動’’’我母親’’個移民’而我’親’’’對移民’’’’’’我’雙親’未’’學’’們’我們’’’中’’’賤’’’’’由’’國’’’賦予’機’’公正’我今天’’國參議Ⅸ’身’坐’’個’’’’ ’’次公民儀式結’’’我都堅’’那’’’’’’國’談話’我問’們’什麼’’國’’樣’’’國’’們’個’’’’都’扣’心’’’’據’’’’’對’國’’’’我’’’對’’’’’’’興趣’’’’’動’ 當我問’們’什麼’’國’’’們提’’’原’’’’’’’’第’’"我們’’’’’’’國’裏’個’都有’個機’’’個’機"’’們’’’’’’極’’’國’’’們還反覆說’"我們’’’裏’’’’’國’’’批評’’而不用擔驚’’’"’’裏我們有’’’’不’’’’’由’ ’’我’’提’’個請’’ ’’國’民’’欽’’’’’’中’最’’’’’對我國顯而’見’’誠’請’’’’’’’有’’’誠’請’識’’’個’國’不贊’’關’援’尼’’瓜反對’’’’’’’仍’’’樣’’’’’’國’ 雖’我們’’懇’’’支援’國’策略’’’’不’麼做’ 而’’國’不’’’’’’’’不證’’個’’’’國’’’我’’說’’’’’國’不’’’’’’’’不證’’個’’’’國’’’實際’’我們’’公’’示’’’’見’左而不必懼’報’’’’’’我們’由’實質’’’而’它’’我們 永’’由’ 我還有最’’’請’’’’’’’做’’’’’’做’’那樣’奮’投’關’’’問’’’論’’’請採’’種’論方式’’’重那’’’’’不’’’們’’國精’’動機’正’’’望’們’重’’’國精’’動機’樣’ Colonel North, you talked here often and eloquently about the need for a democratic outcome in Nicaragua. There is no disagreement on that. There is disagreement over how best to achieve that objective. Many Americans agree with the President's policy. Many do not. Many patriotic Americans, strongly anti-Communist, believe there's a better way to contain the Sandinistas, to bring about a democratic outcome in Nicaragua, and to bring peace to Central America. And many patriotic Americans are concerned that in the pursuit of democracy abroad, we not compromise it in any way here at home. You and others have urged consistency in our policies. You said that if we are not consistent, our allies and other nations will question our reliability. That's a real concern. But, if it's bad to change policies, it's worse to have two different policies at the same time, one public policy and an opposite policy in private. It's difficult to conceive of a greater inconsistency than that. It's hard to imagine anything that would give our allies more cause to consider us unreliable than that we say one thing in public and secretly do another. And that's exactly what was done when arms were sold to Iran, and those arms were swapped for hostages. Now, you've talked a lot about patriotism and the love of our country. Most nations derive from a single tribe or a single race. They practice a single religion. Common racial, ethnic, and religious heritages are the glue of nationhood for many. The United States is different. We have all races, all religions, a limited common heritage. The glue of nationhood for us is the American ideal of individual liberty and equal justice. The rule of law is critical in our society. The law is the great equalizer, because in America everybody is equal before the law. We must never allow the end to justify the means where the law is concerned. However important and noble an objective― and surely democracy abroad is important and noble― it cannot be achieved at the expense of the rule of law in our country. You talked about your background and it was really very compelling. It's obviously one of the reasons why the American people are attracted to you. Let me tell you a story from my background. Before I entered the Senate I had the great honor of serving as a Federal Judge. In that position I had great power. The one I most enjoyed exercising was the power to make people American citizens. From time to time I presided at what we call naturalization ceremonies. They are citizenship ceremonies. People came from all over the world, risked their lives, sometimes left their families and fortunes behind to come here. They had gone through the required procedures and I, in the final act, administered to them the oath of allegiance to the United States and I made them American citizens. To this moment― to this moment it was the most exciting thing I have ever done in my life. The ceremonies were always moving for me because my mother was an immigrant and my father was the orphan son of immigrants. Neither of them had any education and they worked at very menial tasks in our society. But because of opportunity and equal justice under law in America, I sit here today a United States senator. After every one of these ceremonies, I made it a point to speak to these new Americans. I asked them why they came, how they came to this country. Their stories, each of them, were inspiring. I think you would be interested and moved by them, given the views you have expressed on this country. When I asked them why they came they said several things, mostly two. The first is that "We came because here in America everyone has a chance, an opportunity." They also said over and over again, particularly those from totalitarian societies, "We came here because in America you can criticize the government without looking over your shoulder." Here we have freedom to disagree with our government. You have addressed several pleas to this committee, none more forceful than when you asked that the Congress not cut off aid to the (contras, for the love of God and for the love of country. Now I address a plea to you. Of your qualities which the American people find compelling, none is more compelling than your obvious devotion to our country. Please remember that others share that devotion. And recognize that it is possible for an American to disagree with you on aid to the Contras, and still love God and still love this country as much as you do. Although He is regularly asked to do so, God does not take sides in American politics. And, in America, disagreement with the policies of the government is not evidence of a lack of patriotism. I want to repeat that. In America, disagreement with policies of the government is not evidence of a lack of patriotism. Indeed, it's the very fact that we can openly disagree with the government without fear of reprisal that is the essence of our freedom, and will keep us free. I have one final plea. Debate this issue forcefully and vigorously, as you have and as you surely will. But, please, do it in a way that respects the patriotism and the motives of those who disagree with you, as you would have them respect yours. ’ ’ |