[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 157 (Sunday, November 9, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H10509-H10524]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   EXPRESSING SENSE OF CONGRESS WITH RESPECT TO GERMAN GOVERNMENT'S 
      DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MEMBERS OF MINORITY RELIGIOUS GROUPS

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 22) expressing the sense of the 
Congress with respect to the discrimination by the German Government 
against members of minority religious groups, particularly the 
continued and increasing discrimination by the German Government 
against performers, entertainers, and other artists from the United 
States associated with Scientology, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 22

       Whereas since World War II, Germany has been a friend and 
     ally of the United States;
       Whereas German government discrimination against members of 
     minority religious groups, particularly against United States 
     citizens, has the potential to harm the relationship between 
     Germany and the United States;
       Whereas artists from the United States associated with 
     certain religious minorities have been denied the opportunity 
     to perform, have been the subjects of boycotts, and have been 
     the victims of a widespread and well-documented pattern and 
     practice of discrimination by German Federal, State, local, 
     and party officials;
       Whereas the 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996 United States 
     Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights in 
     Germany all noted government discrimination against members 
     of the Church of Scientology in Germany;
       Whereas the German State of Baden-Wuerttemberg barred Chic 
     Corea, the Grammy Award-winning American jazz pianist, from 
     performing his music during the World Athletics Championship 
     in 1993, and in 1996 the State of Bavaria declared its 
     intention to bar Mr. Corea from all future performances at 
     State sponsored events solely because he is a member of the 
     Church of Scientology;
       Whereas the Young Union of the Christian Democratic Union 
     and the Social Democratic Party orchestrated boycotts of the 
     movies ``Phenomenon'' and ``Mission Impossible'' solely 
     because the lead actors, Americans John Travolta and Tom 
     Cruise, are members of the Church of Scientology;
       Whereas members of the Young Union of the Christian 
     Democratic Union disrupted a 1993 performance by the American 
     folk music group Golden Bough by storming the stage solely 
     because the musicians are members of the Church of 
     Scientology;
       Whereas the Evangelical Christian Church of Cologne, led by 
     an American clergyman, Dr. Terry Jones, had its tax-exempt 
     status revoked by the German government with the reason being 
     that the church benefits to society were of ``no spiritual, 
     cultural, or material value'';
       Whereas the German government is constitutionally obligated 
     to remain neutral on religious matters, yet has violated this 
     neutrality by supporting and distributing information to the 
     general public that gives the impression that ``sect-
     experts'', who are only critical of all but the major 
     churches, are in a position to provide the public with fair, 
     objective, and politically neutral information about minority 
     religions;
       Whereas the Jehovah's Witnesses' application for 
     recognition as a corporation under public law, which would 
     have put them on equal legal status with the Catholic and 
     Protestant churches, was denied by the Federal Administrative 
     Court because the church's doctrine of political neutrality 
     was considered to be antidemocratic;
       Whereas government officials and ``sect-experts'' are using 
     the decision denying the Jehovah's Witnesses recognition as a 
     corporation under public law as a justification for 
     discriminatory acts against the Jehovah's Witnesses, despite 
     the fact that a constitutional complaint is still pending 
     before the German Constitutional Court;
       Whereas adherents of the Muslim faith have reported that 
     they are routinely subject to police violence and 
     intimidation because of their ethnic and religious 
     affiliation;
       Whereas the 1994 and 1995 Reports to the Human Rights 
     Commission of the United Nations on the application of the 
     Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance 
     and of Discrimination Based on Religion and Belief by the 
     Special Rapporteur for Religious Intolerance criticized 
     Germany for restricting the religious liberty of certain 
     minority religious groups;
       Whereas Germany, as a signatory to the Universal 
     Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on 
     Civil and Political Rights, and the Helsinki Accords, is 
     obliged to refrain from religious discrimination and to 
     foster a climate of tolerance; and
       Whereas Germany's policy of discrimination against minority 
     religions violates German obligations under the Universal 
     Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on 
     Civil and Political Rights, and the Helsinki Accords: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That the Congress--
       (1) continues to hold Germany responsible for protecting 
     the rights of United States citizens who are living, 
     performing, doing business, or traveling in Germany, in a 
     manner consistent with Germany's obligations under 
     international agreements to which Germany is a signatory;
       (2) deplores the actions and statements of Federal, State, 
     local, and party officials in Germany which have fostered an 
     atmosphere of intolerance toward certain minority religious 
     groups;
       (3) expresses concern that artists from the United States 
     who are members of minority religious groups continue to 
     experience German government discrimination;
       (4) urges the German government to take the action 
     necessary to protect the rights guaranteed to members of 
     minority religious groups by international covenants to which 
     Germany is a signatory; and
       (5) calls upon the President of the United States--
       (A) to assert the concern of the United States Government 
     regarding German government discrimination against members of 
     minority religious groups;
       (B) to emphasize that the United States regards the human 
     rights practices of the Government of Germany, particularly 
     its treatment of American citizens who are living, 
     performing, doing business, or traveling in Germany, as a 
     significant factor in the United States Government's 
     relations with the Government of Germany; and
       (C) to encourage other governments to appeal to the 
     Government of Germany, and to cooperate with other 
     governments and international organizations, including the 
     United Nations and its agencies, in efforts to protect the 
     rights of foreign citizens and members of minority religious 
     groups in Germany.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Gilman] and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Payne] each 
will control 20 minutes.

[[Page H10510]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire whether the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Payne] is in opposition to the 
resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Payne] 
in opposition to the resolution?
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I am in support of the resolution.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Then, Mr. Speaker, I would claim the time in opposition 
to the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Gilman] and gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, my inquiry is if Mr. Gilman would give half 
of his time for those who are in favor of the amendment.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to yield appropriate time 
to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Payne] will control 10 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  [Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)


                             General Leave

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on 
this measure and include extraneous materials.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, while I do not take pleasure in bringing 
this resolution to the floor criticizing Germany, we must be frank with 
our friends. And when repeated treaties have failed and the matter is 
serious enough, we must not hesitate in speaking frankly and on the 
Record.
  Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the German public officials have 
displayed an unfortunate record of speech and action against minority 
religions, action that, in my opinion, amounts to discrimination and 
violation of German obligations under international law.
  This resolution calls attention of the public to those actions, calls 
upon Germany to change its behavior, and asks the President to take 
appropriate action. I will not belabor these issues and will provide a 
longer statement under leave to revise and extend my remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Payne] is sponsor to 
this resolution, as well as the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Salmon] and 
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney], each of whom has taken a great 
interest in this legislation and are deserving of our commendation. The 
resolution has been considerably broadened and softened in the course 
of its consideration in the committee. And Members may refer to the 
amendment now at the desk, copies of which are available on the floor.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I first became aware of the problem of 
religious minorities in Germany well over a year ago when I had the 
opportunity to visit with American citizens about the problems that 
their coreligionists had in Germany.
  I have had the opportunity to discuss this on several occasions with 
German Government officials. I have raised this issue in the context of 
my profound respect for Germany as a friend of the United States. More 
than a friend, it has become an especially close ally and, in addition, 
a country that has done a great deal in recent years to protect and 
uphold human rights around the world. This matter may distress our 
German friends. But we must be frank with friends.
  The German Government perceives Scientology and certain other 
religious minorities as dangerous or not valuable to their society and 
as not having the right to the same privileges as other religions. I am 
sympathetic with German concerns that its history requires that its 
society be vigilantly protected against totalitarianism. We are all too 
familiar with how small organizations can grow into important threats 
to human rights and world peace.
  Let me be clear. I have criticized some of the tactics of the Church 
of Scientology in its public relations campaign against Germany. The 
use of Nazi imagery by the church or its supporters to characterize the 
present Government of Germany is improper and unacceptable. But we 
cannot allow our distaste for some of the tactics of Scientology's 
supporters to undermine our concern about individual rights if we 
believe they are violated.
  The fact is that healthy democracies such as Germany have potent 
weapons against groups when they take actions that actually threaten 
their societies. Democracies need not and ought not to discriminate 
against people based on matters of conscience or affiliation.
  I am particularly concerned when discrimination against individuals 
on religious ground is encouraged. While some public officials may have 
an honest belief in the truth of their accusations, the political 
process can encourage politicians to engage in scapegoating and playing 
to public prejudices for partisan gain. This can, as we know--as 
Germans above all know--end in tragedy.
  In this connection, I am dismayed with regard to some of the remarks 
that have been reported to have been uttered by German officials 
responsible for the protection of the Constitution.
  For example, in the course of an interview printed on October 13 of 
this year in Die Welt, ostensibly devoted to discussing anti-Western, 
extremist trends within Islam, Peter Frisch, head of the German Federal 
Office of the Protection of the Constitution, stated that ``there are 
several tens of thousands of Muslims in Germany who are converts from 
Christianity. There is one Islamic center that has expressly issued 
instructions to marry German women. The women would then convert to 
Islam and their children should be brought up accordingly.'' This sort 
of irrelevant, hatemongering rhetoric is unbecoming of an official 
charged with safeguarding human rights. This is the same official, by 
the way, who is today investigating Scientology.
  During the period leading up to the consideration of this resolution 
in committee, and thereafter, there have been accusations that the 
German Government has been denied the opportunity to make it case. I 
would note that it is not the normal practice of our committee to call 
foreign ambassadors as witnesses and there was no request from the 
German Ambassador to be heard. I moreover note that I have discussed 
Scientology with the German Ambassador; the sponsors of this resolution 
may wish to address the accusation by the German Ambassador that they 
are unwilling to meet with him. Such an accusation was denied on the 
record at our committee markup.
  Further, I note that the German Ambassador was invited by Senator 
D'Amato from New York to appear or send a representative of the German 
Government to a hearing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation 
in Europe, which he chairs. The German Ambassador declined because a 
German Government official could not in principle appear before the 
Commission. I will include in the Record a copy of Senator D'Amato 
letter dated November 6, to me on this issue, and the German 
Ambassador's letter to me on the resolution, dated September 16, 1997.
  The Department of State has worked on the problems of Scientologists 
and other minority religions in Germany and has done a good job in 
fostering the American perspective. But this dialog has gone on for 
some time and has had few positive results.
  We hope that adopting this resolution, which has been modified 
considerably since its introduction, would indicate to our German 
friends that there is widespread support for the position that the 
Department has been taking and would spur a reconsideration in Germany 
of the policies that the resolution addresses.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the amended resolution.
                                             The Ambassador of the


                                  Federal Republic of Germany,

                                                 October 29, 1997.
     Hon. Benjamin Gilman,
     Chairman, Committee on International Relations, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing you about H. Con. Res. 22 
     concerning alleged discrimination by the German Government 
     against members of minority religious groups. The draft 
     resolution I have seen contains allegations against the 
     German federal and state governments which are entirely 
     unfounded and absurd, and I emphatically reject them.
       As you know, Germany is a free country in which religious 
     freedom is guaranteed under the constitution and thus 
     sacrosanct. Indeed, this fact was clearly confirmed in the 
     latest United States Department of State Country Report on 
     Human Rights. Furthermore, I

[[Page H10511]]

     would like to add that no artist from the United States 
     associated with certain religious minorities has been denied 
     the right to perform in Germany.
       I have enclosed information about the Scientology 
     organization and the Cologne Christian Community, which 
     speaks for itself. If you review it carefully, you will find 
     that the German authorities have not disturbed the practice 
     of religious freedom. Rather, on the contrary, there are 
     increasing indications that the Scientology organization uses 
     totalitarian and thus unconstitutional means to oppress its 
     members and their families.
       Germany is a close and trusted U.S. ally. If the current 
     draft resolution were to come before your committee and to 
     the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote, such a 
     move would be incomprehensible to my government, the German 
     Parliament, and the German public. Moreover, it would be 
     inconsistent with the excellent status of our bilateral 
     relations and, indeed, could harm them.
       I would be very grateful if you could take these concerns 
     into account in deciding how to proceed. In the past months, 
     I have attempted several times to arrange an appointment with 
     the co-sponsors of an earlier draft of this resolution in 
     order to explain the German position on the Scientology 
     organization.
       Regrettably, the Congressional members did not wish to meet 
     with me on this matter. It therefore goes without saying that 
     I would be happy to discuss this matter with you anytime.
       I will send a copy of this letter to the House ranking 
     minority member on the International Relations Committee, 
     Congressman Lee Hamilton.
           Sincerely,
     Jurgan Chrobog.
                                                                    ____



                                nonpaper

       It cannot be said that the Christliche Gemeinde Koln--the 
     Cologne Christian Community--is being persecuted or 
     discriminated against by public institutions. Freedom of 
     belief is fully and unconditionally guaranteed in Germany. 
     The members of the Christliche Gemeinde Koln also are free to 
     practice their belief.


                            nonprofit status

       As in the United States, religious communities in Germany 
     must supply specific proof that they are nonprofit 
     organizations in order to become tax exempt. After a thorough 
     review of the Christliche Gemeinde Koln, the German tax 
     authorities have found that the conditions under which the 
     sect was originally recognized as a nonprofit organization no 
     longer exist. For this reason, the Christliche Gemeinde Koln 
     will be assessed from now on, as are other noncharitable 
     organizations.
       The Christliche Gemeinde Koln has appealed this decision. A 
     judgment by the Tax Court is still pending in this appeal.


         dismissals of members of the Christliche Gemeinde Koln

       The German Government does not yet have any relevant 
     information concerning the legal background of the 
     dismissals. It therefore cannot take a position on the 
     discrimination charges at this time.
                                                                    ____

                                            Commission on Security


                                    and Cooperation in Europe,

                                                 November 6, 1997.
     Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman,
     Chairman, Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Following your Committee's mark-up of H. 
     Con. Res. 22 concerning German discrimination against 
     individuals holding minority religions or beliefs, I noted 
     that the German Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs, Klaus 
     Kinkel, has reportedly said that the German Ambassador to the 
     United States, Jurgen Chrobog, has offered to explain the 
     German position to Congress, but ``. . . he has had no chance 
     to do this.'' (``Kinkel Rejects American Critique: `No 
     Persecution of Religious Minorities in Germany,' '' in the 
     Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (National), November 3, 1997.) 
     This assertion is false.
       I have attached for your information a copy of a letter of 
     invitation sent to Ambassador Chrobog on August 25, 1997. The 
     relevant portion of the letter reads as follows: ``I write 
     today to invite a representative of the Federal Republic of 
     Germany to testify at a public hearing of the Commission to 
     be held at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, September 18, 1997, in 
     room SDG-50 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The 
     subject of the hearing will be `Emerging Intolerance in the 
     Federal Republic of Germany.' It will focus on official 
     policies and actions directed at members of minority ethnic 
     groups and minority religions and beliefs contrary to the 
     Federal Republic's international obligations.''
       Commission staff engaged in repeated telephonic 
     conversations with officials at the Embassy of the Federal 
     Republic of Germany to ascertain whether the German 
     government would provide a witness at the hearing. At no time 
     did any German official indicate that a witness would be 
     provided.
       After reviewing the problem of religious intolerance, I 
     decided to broaden the scope of the hearing and accordingly 
     changed its title to ``Religious Intolerance in Europe 
     Today,'' so that the Commission could better address the 
     Europe-wide nature of the problem. On September 9, 1997 my 
     Chief of Staff sent Ambassador Chrobog's deputy, Mr. Thomas 
     Matussek, a note explaining the change in scope and 
     indicating that no official German witness was needed.
       On September 16, 1997, Ambassador Chrobog wrote to the 
     Commission saying that ``. . . an official representative of 
     Germany cannot, on principle, testify before the 
     Commission.'' Since the Commission is an independent agency 
     of the United States government, duly authorized by law, a 
     clarification of the principle invoked by Ambassador Chrobog 
     would be in order to determine if it would be possible for an 
     official of the Federal Republic of Germany to speak on the 
     record in public before any U.S. government body.
       The Ambassador's letter enclosed a background paper 
     outlining the German government's official position on the 
     subject. By telephone, the Embassy asked that this paper be 
     made available to Commissioners. I agreed to do that and 
     copies of the Ambassador's letter and attached information 
     were placed on the dais at the hearing for the use of 
     Commissioners.
       In addition, the German Embassy requested that the paper 
     enclosed with the Ambassador's letter be included in the 
     hearing record. I have also agreed to do that. When the 
     hearing record is published, it will contain all of the 
     documents I have attached to this letter.
       I provide you with this detailed record of the Commission's 
     interactions with the Federal Republic of Germany's official 
     representatives so that you may accurately respond to the 
     allegation that official German views have not had the 
     opportunity to be presented to the House or Senate on this 
     subject. The opportunity was offered, and, unlike the 
     ambassadors and official representatives of candidate NATO 
     member states who appeared, testified, and responded to 
     questions at Commission hearings on that subject during the 
     spring of 1997, the German position was that they would not 
     provide a witness. I have responded positively to their 
     request that their written views be made available. In 
     addition, staff level contacts have continued as the 
     Commission seeks information.
       Without attempting to discuss all of the problems in the 
     official German position on this issue, I want to highlight 
     the fact that Principle VII of the Final Act of the 
     Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (the 
     ``Helsinki Accords,'' to which the Federal Republic of 
     Germany is a party), provides, in pertinent part, that ``. . 
     . the participating States will recognize and respect the 
     freedom of the individual to profess and practice, alone or 
     in community with others, religion or belief acting in 
     accordance with the dictates of his own conscience.'' The 
     repeatedly asserted official German position that Scientology 
     is not a ``religion'' does not meet Germany's international 
     human rights obligations. Whether or not Scientology is a 
     religion is irrelevant in this case, because ``belief'' is a 
     broader term than ``religion,'' and Germany's official policy 
     toward Scientology ignores the fact that ``belief'' is a 
     protected category under the Helsinki Accords. Note that 
     Principle VII is phrased in the disjunctive, religion or 
     belief, and that Germany's policy toward Scientology is, we 
     believe, in violation of this critically important principle.
       I appreciate this opportunity to assist you in dealing with 
     this matter, and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     on issues of mutual concern.
           Sincerely,
                                          Alfonse D'Amato, U.S.S.,
     Chairman.
                                                                    ____

                                            Commission on Security


                                    and Cooperation in Europe,

                                                  August 25, 1997.
     His Excellency Jurgen Chrobog,
     Ambassador, Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Ambassador: I write today to invite a 
     representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to testify 
     at a public hearing of the Commission to be held at 10:00 am 
     on Thursday, September 18, 1997, in room SDG-50 of the 
     Dirksen Senate Office Building. The subject of the hearing 
     will be ``Emerging Intolerance in the Federal Republic of 
     Germany.'' It will focus on official policies and actions 
     directed at members of minority ethnic groups and minority 
     religions and beliefs contrary to the Federal Republic's 
     international obligations.
       The Commission is also inviting an official witness from 
     the Executive Branch to present the official United States 
     position on these matters as reflected in the Department of 
     State's ``Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 
     1996,'' and other official statements.
       While detailed plans for the hearing's organization are not 
     yet final, I anticipate having three panels of witnesses; a 
     first panel of official witnesses; a second panel of non-
     governmental organization and academic experts; and a third 
     panel of publicly prominent Scientologists who have had 
     experience with German policies on the Church of Scientology 
     and its adherents. The third panel is occasioned in 
     particular because of the Council of Ministers' decision to 
     place the Church of Scientology ``under observation'' by the 
     Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and 
     coordinate state bodies.
       I appreciate your kind attention to this request and 
     express the hope that you or someone else who can speak with 
     authority and credibility on Germany's approach to these 
     problems can testify to present the Federal

[[Page H10512]]

     Republic's official position with the accuracy and clarity it 
     deserves.
       In order to help Members prepare for the hearing, the 
     Commission requests that you provide 75 copies of your 
     written testimony at least one day prior to the hearing. Oral 
     presentations should be approximately 7-10 minutes in length. 
     If your desire, you may provide additional written material 
     for inclusion in the hearing record.
       I look forward to working with you on this and other issues 
     of common concern.
           Sincerely,
                                          Alfonse D'Amato, U.S.S.,
     Chairman.
                                                                    ____

                                             The Ambassador of the


                                  Federal Republic of Germany,

                                               September 16, 1997.
     Senator Alfonse D'Amato,
     Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator D'Amato: Thank you very much for your letter 
     dated August 25, inviting a representative of the Federal 
     Republic of Germany to testify at the public hearing 
     ``Emerging Intolerance in the Federal Republic of Germany,'' 
     to be held by the Commission on Security and Cooperation in 
     Europe on September 18. I am also aware that my deputy, Mr. 
     Thomas Matussek, has received a letter, dated September 9, 
     from Mr. Hathaway, Chief of Staff of the Commission on 
     Security and Cooperation in Europe, explaining that the scope 
     of the hearing has now been changed.
       Please understand that an official representative of 
     Germany cannot, on principle, testify before the Commission. 
     As you may know, I have proposed on several occasions to meet 
     individually with various Members of Congress to explain 
     Germany's approach to the Scientology organization. While 
     none of your colleagues expressed an interest in an exchange 
     of views, I would be glad to renew my offer.
       In the meantime, I enclose a background paper outlining the 
     German position on the Scientology organization. The 
     Commission staff has already been supplied with a copy.
           Sincerely,
     Jurgen Chrobog.
                                                                    ____



                        scientology and Germany

       Since October 1996 the Church of Scientology has waged an 
     aggressive campaign against Germany. Using full-page ads in 
     the New York Times and the Washington Post, the Scientology 
     organization has compared the treatment of Scientologists in 
     present-day Germany with that of the Jews under the Nazi 
     regime. This is not only a distortion of the facts, but also 
     an insult to the victims of the Holocaust. Officials in 
     Germany and the U.S. have repeatedly spoken out against this 
     blatant misuse of the Holocaust. Ignatz Bubis, Germany's top 
     Jewish leader, denounced the comparison as ``false'' and most 
     recently, State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns at a 
     press briefing on June 6, 1997 said:
       ``Germany needs to be protected, the German Government and 
     the German leadership need to be protected from this wild 
     charge made by the Church of Scientology in the U.S. that 
     somehow the treatment of Scientology in Germany can or should 
     be compared to the treatment of Jews who had to live, and who 
     ultimately perished, under Nazi rule in the 1930s. This 
     wildly inaccurate comparison is most unfair to Chancellor 
     Kohl and to his government and to regional governments and 
     city governments throughout Germany. It has been made 
     consistently by supporters of Scientology here in the United 
     States, and by Scientologists themselves. I do want to 
     disassociate the U.S. Government from this campaign. We 
     reject this campaign. It is most unfair to Germany and to 
     Germans in general''.
       After having conducted thorough studies on the Scientology 
     organization, the Federal Government has come to the 
     conclusion that the organization's pseudo-scientific courses 
     can seriously jeopardize individuals' mental and physical 
     health and that it exploits its members. Expert testimony and 
     credible reports have confirmed that membership can lead to 
     psychological and physical dependency, to financial ruin and 
     even to suicide.
       In addition, there are indications that Scientology poses a 
     threat to Germany's basic political principles.
       Because of its experiences during the Nazi regime, Germany 
     feels a special responsibility to monitor the development of 
     any extreme group within its borders. German society is 
     particularly alert towards radicalism of any kind and has set 
     stiff standards for itself when dealing with aggressive, 
     extreme groups--even when the groups are small in number.
       Every citizen in Germany has the right to challenge the 
     legality of government decisions which affect him or her, in 
     an independent court. The Scientology organization has made 
     ample use of its right to go to court in Germany and will 
     continue to do so. Up until now, no court has found that the 
     basic and human rights of Scientology members have been 
     violated.


                        is scientology a threat?

       According to a decision of March 22, 1995, by the Federal 
     Labor Court, Scientology utilizes ``inhuman and totalitarian 
     practices.'' Often members are separated from their families 
     and friends. The organization is structured so as to make the 
     individual psychologically and financially dependent on a 
     Scientology system. There are cases of the Scientology 
     organization using this system of control and assertion of 
     absolute authority to exercise undue influence in certain 
     economic sectors--particularly in personnel and management 
     training--causing serious harm to some individuals.
       In response to the growing number of letters from concerned 
     parents and family members, particularly from those with 
     relatives in Scientology, the German Parliament (Bundestag) 
     established an investigative commission which will present a 
     report on the activities of ``sects and psycho-cults'' in the 
     course of the year 1997.
       In the United States, two legal cases involving Scientology 
     support the German Federal Government's concerns about the 
     organization. In the early 1980s, 11 top Scientologists were 
     convicted in the United States for plotting to plant spies in 
     federal agencies, break into government offices and bug at 
     least one IRS meeting. Referring to Scientology's battle with 
     the IRS for tax-exempt status, The New York Times in a front-
     page article published March 9, 1997 ``found that the (tax) 
     exemption followed a series of unusual internal IRS actions 
     that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by 
     Scientology against the agency and people who work there. 
     Among the findings . . . were these: Scientology's lawyers 
     hired private investigators to dig into the private lives of 
     IRS officials and to conduct surveillance operations to 
     uncover potential vulnerabilities.'' In 1994, the U.S. 
     Supreme Court upheld a California court's finding of 
     substantial evidence that Scientology practices took place in 
     a coercive environment and rejected Scientology's claims that 
     the practices were protected under religious freedom 
     guaranties.
       In other countries, too, the Scientology organization is 
     increasingly seen with great concern. In France, a government 
     commission led by Prime Minister Juppe, and charged with 
     monitoring the activities of sects, convened its first 
     meeting in mid-November 1996. On November 22, 1996, in Lyon, 
     several leading Scientologists were found guilty of 
     involuntary manslaughter and fraud in a case where methods 
     taught by Scientology were found to have driven a person to 
     suicide.
       In Italy during December 1996, an Italian court ordered 
     jail terms for 29 Scientologists found guilty of ``criminal 
     association.''
       In Greece, a judge declared in January 1997 that an Athens 
     Scientology group was illegal after ruling that the group had 
     used false pretenses to obtain an operating license.


                  Is Scientology a Bona-fide Religion?

       In its ads and writings, the Scientology organization 
     claims it is internationally recognized as a religion, except 
     in Germany. This is false.
       Among the countries that do not consider Scientology a 
     religion are Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, 
     Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, and Spain, as well as Israel and 
     Mexico.
       In the United States, the Scientology organization did in 
     fact receive tax-exempt status as a religious congregation in 
     1993--after a decades-long, contentious battle with the IRS.
       In Germany, it is possible for organizations undertaking 
     non-profit activities to be exempt from taxation. Up until 
     now, attempts by the Scientology organization to obtain such 
     status have failed. Two of the highest German courts recently 
     dealt with cases involving the Scientology organization. The 
     Federal Labor Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) in its above 
     mentioned decision on March 22, 1995, also ruled, that the 
     Scientology branch in Hamburg was not a religious 
     congregation, but clearly a commercial enterprise. In its 
     decision, the court quotes one of L. Ron Hubbard's 
     instructions ``make money, make more money--make other people 
     produce so as to make money'' and concludes that Scientology 
     purports to be a ``church'' merely as a cover to pursue its 
     economic interests.
       The Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) 
     confirmed decisions by lower administrative courts that the 
     Scientology organization has to register its economic 
     activities as a business with the relevant authorities 
     (decision of February 16, 1995).
       Also in France, the Scientology organization is neither a 
     religion nor a non-profit institution. The organization's 
     Paris head office was closed in early 1996 for not paying 
     back taxes.
       In Great Britain, the Scientology organization has been 
     rebuffed repeatedly by the Charity Commission which insisted 
     as recently as 1995 that the organization could not be 
     considered a religion under British law and could, therefore, 
     not enjoy any tax-exempt status.


Federal and Regional Action Taken Against the Scientologists in Germany

       On June 6, 1997, Federal and State Ministers of the 
     Interior agreed to place the Scientology organization under 
     surveillance. The Ministers have established that several 
     activities of the Scientology organization may operate 
     contrary to democratic principles and therefore warrants a 
     formal investigation by the Office for the Protection of the 
     Constitution (Verfassungschutz). The investigation will focus 
     on the structure of the organization and not on individual 
     members. Concrete details regarding the extent of the 
     investigation are not available at this time, but more 
     information will be disclosed following the investigation's 
     first year. Referring to the investigation, Manfred Kanther,

[[Page H10513]]

     Federal Minister of the Interior, said on June 6, 1997: ``The 
     year's surveillance will establish whether the organization 
     is simply an unpleasant group, a criminal organization or an 
     association with anti-constitutional aims.''
       Some of the German states have taken steps to protect their 
     citizens against Scientology:
       As of November 1, 1996, all applicants for admission to 
     Bavarian public service and Bavarian public service employees 
     must indicate whether they belong to the Scientology 
     organization. Membership in Scientology alone does not 
     automatically exclude individuals from public service.


       The Scientology Public Relations campaign Against Germany

       The Scientology organization has financed several highly 
     visible public relations campaigns directed against the 
     Federal Republic of Germany in American publications. Among 
     the papers that have carried full-page ads in the last couple 
     of years are the New York Times, the Washington Post and the 
     International Herald Tribune. In addition, the International 
     Herald Tribune published a controversial open letter to 
     German Chancellor Helmut Kohl.
       The Scientology organization has also distributed pamphlets 
     such as ``The Rise of Hatred and Violence in Germany,'' 
     reiterating its allegations.
       The open letter to Chancellor Kohl, written by a Hollywood 
     lawyer with famous Scientology clients, appeared in early 
     1997 in the International Herald Tribune. The letter repeated 
     Scientology organization assertions against Germany and was 
     signed by 34 American celebrities. ``Disgraceful and 
     irresponsible'' is how Michel Friedman, a member of the 
     Central Council of Jews in Germany, described the letter. He 
     added: ``It's totally off the mark. Today, we have a 
     democracy and a state based on the rule of law.''
       Following the letter, the U.S. State Department again 
     criticized the Scientologists' public relations campaign, 
     saying, ``we have advised the Scientology community not to 
     run those ads because the German government is a democratic 
     government and it governs a free people. And it is simply 
     outrageous to compare the current Germany leadership to the 
     Nazi-era leadership. We've told the Scientologists this, and 
     in this sense we share the outrage of many Germans to see 
     their government compared to the Nazis.''


                     Are the Cases in the Ads True?

       The Scientologists' repeated allegations that artists 
     belonging to Scientology are being discriminated against in 
     Germany are false. Freedom of artistic expression is 
     guaranteed in Article 5(3) of the German Basic Law (Germany's 
     Constitution), thus artists are free to perform or exhibit in 
     Germany anywhere they please.
       Jazz pianist Chick Corea performed in Germany as recently 
     as March 24, 1996, during the 27th International Jazz Week 
     held in Burghausen, an event which received approximately 
     $10,000 in funding from the Bavarian Ministry of Culture.
       ``Mission Impossible,'' starring Tom Cruise, was a hit in 
     Germany, grossing $23.6 million.
       Likewise, the Scientologists' claim that a teacher who 
     taught near the city of Hannover was fired for her beliefs is 
     untrue. The woman was not fired, though she repeatedly 
     violated school regulations by using the classroom to recruit 
     students and their parents to Scientology. After multiple 
     warnings, the woman was transferred from classroom to 
     administrative duties to prevent further violations.
       Contrary to allegations that Scientologists' children have 
     been prevented from attending school, all children in 
     Germany, including Scientologists', are legally required to 
     attend school. If a Scientologist's child is not enrolled in 
     a German school, it can only be that the parent has pulled 
     the child out.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
and rise in strong opposition to the legislation.
  (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this legislation came to the House 
Committee on International Relations with very little notice. It was on 
the agenda one morning. We have no Europe and Middle East subcommittee, 
and this legislation is one more argument why we should have so that 
bad and defective legislation, which in my judgment this is, can be 
vetted by the subcommittee, reworked, or stopped at that point before 
it comes to the House floor.
  I think this legislation, if the Members of the body were fully 
familiar with it, would be voted down. We are taking it up in the last 
hours of the Congress. I am very concerned about the kind of message 
that it will send.
  What we do on this body does matter when it comes to statements on 
foreign policy. We may consider it to be a very lightly relevant issue 
at times. But I will tell my colleagues, across the oceans when other 
countries look at what we do, they take it very seriously. So we have 
to be very careful.
  The Ambassador from Germany to the United States has weighed in with 
about as strong a letter as I have seen, refuting some of the arguments 
that have been made by proponents of the legislation. He contends he 
did not have an opportunity to meet with the Members who were 
sponsoring it. That has been argued about in the committee, as I 
understand it.
  But I think one important point would be this: This comes down, as I 
understand it, to a matter of taxation with respect to what we would 
say in English would be the Cologne Christian community, because they, 
in Germany, do not consider Scientology to be a religion. Therefore, 
they tax it. But Germany is not alone in that respect. So does Belgium, 
France, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, and 
Europe, plus Israel and Mexico. And those are just the countries that I 
know about.
  So it seems to me to bring this legislation here aiming it at 
Germany, which was at first at least almost exclusively a Scientology-
oriented legislation, now been broadened with an amendment to change 
it, I think is inappropriate. It is unbalanced. It is damaging to our 
relations with Germany. And there is no real cause for us to be 
considering this kind of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, as a sponsor of this bill expressing disapproval of 
religious discrimination by the German Government, I want to thank my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have joined in supporting a 
very basic, democratic right, freedom of religion.
  This bipartisan resolution was approved by the full Committee on 
International Relations after performing artists associated with 
religious minorities were denied the opportunity to perform in Germany 
and were also kept out of the political process. As our resolution 
states, the German Government is constitutionally obligated to remain 
neutral on religious matters, but it has violated this neutrality.
  The United States, as the leader of the free world and champion of 
democracy around the globe, has an obligation to take a stand whenever 
we see basic religious rights being restricted, whether their religious 
affiliation is Muslim, Christian, Jewish, or any other faith. 
Performing artists from the United States have been denied the right to 
perform in Germany based on their personal spiritual beliefs.
  When our citizens visit and work abroad, they should be able to live 
in peace without the fear of religious intolerance or mistreatment by 
the host government. In turn, when individuals visit the United States 
or decide to live here, they have a right to be able to worship freely 
and join any organization or group they choose to. These are good-faith 
gestures. Discrimination against a person because of his or her 
personal beliefs is always objectionable.
  Congress should stand up and say that we strongly disprove of 
religious intolerance. Germany is a friend, has been a friend for some 
time, an ally of the United States, and we want that relationship to 
remain strong and mutually beneficial. That is why we are calling on 
the German Government to respect the fundamental rights of every 
citizen of a democracy, the right to enjoy religious freedom.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Virginia [Mr. Pickett].
  Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. 
Bereuter] for yielding me the time.
  I rise in strong opposition to this resolution. This resolution was 
acted upon without a public hearing and without a committee report and 
should, at the very least, be further considered by the committee. The 
sweeping allegations in the resolution are based upon a handful of 
alleged events that in no way support the allegations. This is serious 
business.
  Germany is one of our Nation's staunchest and most dependable allies. 
The only purpose this resolution will serve is to create ill will and 
less friendly relations with a steadfast

[[Page H10514]]

friend. America needs the full and enthusiastic support of strong and 
dependable nations like Germany. If it is to be successful in carrying 
out its mandate of world leadership, we should not be petty and elevate 
every issue to embarrassing confrontation.
  When folks on one side of the street start throwing rocks, it is not 
long before folks on the other side start throwing them back. This 
resolution is bad for our country. I urge Members to reject it.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, can you tell me how much time we have 
consumed?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] has 
8\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] 
has 16\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. 
Payne] has 8 minutes remaining.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona [Mr. Salmon], a member of our committee.
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, this is a wonderful opportunity for us to 
reaffirm what we stand for here in this country, whether or not we 
stand for the ability of Americans, wherever they live, whether it be 
in this country, whether it be Germany, Italy, wherever, to worship 
according to the dictates of their own conscience.
  I have heard my colleagues say that this was not given an adequate 
hearing. Let me tell them that I serve on the committee dealing with 
security and cooperation in Eastern Europe. We had a full day of 
testimony and hearings regarding incident after incident of persecution 
in Germany of minority religions.
  I have heard it also referred to as the Scientology bill. Let me tell 
my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, it is much broader than that. I had folks 
from the Jehovah's Witness religion, folks from other Christian 
religions, Muslims, come into my office and tell me some of the horrors 
that they have had to endure regarding religious persecution in 
Germany. It is much more than just a taxation issue.

                              {time}  1745

  When we talk about American citizens being blacklisted or blackballed 
and boycotted simply because of their religion, not allowed to go 
abroad and perform simply because of their religious persuasion, that 
is something that ought to give us great concern. Furthermore, I have 
heard some of my colleagues on this floor in a whisper, I do not think 
anybody wants to go forth publicly and say anything this ludicrous, but 
I have heard some Members say behind the scenes, ``Wait a minute, this 
is Scientology, they aren't Christian, or they aren't one of the 
mainstream religions.'' I doubt anybody would say something that 
foolish in the light of day because frankly, Mr. Speaker, that is what 
this country began about, it was about religious freedom, religious 
tolerance. That is why a band of people came to this country initially, 
so that they could flee religious persecution. If we do not stand for 
the protection of that, regardless of whether or not it is a minority 
religion, then we stand for nothing. Let me also point out that 
virtually every religion, yes, even Christianity, which I am proud to 
be a believer in, started as a minority religion.
  From that time on, people were persecuted for their beliefs. Whether 
they are killed, whether they are blackballed, whether they are thrown 
out of the country, whatever persecution exists, we have a 
responsibility in our Government to stand up and be counted. If we 
cannot do that, if we cannot speak harshly to our allies who are our 
friends, if we cannot be plain spoken and honest with them, how can we 
be plain spoken and honest with our enemies?
  Last week we debated 8 bills decrying China for its violations on 
human rights. I have heard some say that, ``Gosh, we didn't have any 
officials from Germany come and testify before our committee. 
Therefore, how can we give this serious credence?'' I have served on 
the Committee on International Relations for 3 years and I do not 
recall a public official from any of the governments that we have done 
resolutions on ever coming in and testifying before that committee.
  Frankly, this is all a smoke screen. Let us stand up and be counted. 
Let us stand for what we profess to believe in, that is, religious 
tolerance.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, just for clarification I would indicate 
that the Committee on International Relations did not have hearings on 
this. The Helsinki Commission organization in this body did, but not 
the Committee on International Relations.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Campbell], a member of the committee.
  (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, how quick we are to condemn and how quick 
we are to neglect the advice of scripture to be sure about what may be 
in our own eye before we go and criticize what we find in another's. 
But this is particularly difficult when the criticism is against a 
friend and when we have not given that friend the opportunity to be 
heard.
  Let me be very explicit. We, the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on International Relations, has not given Germany the 
opportunity to be heard. There is an allegation that Senator D'Amato 
might have invited German witnesses, they might have refused. I 
understand that is a give and take in that particular context. I 
understand that at one point Senator D'Amato's chief of staff said that 
a German witness was not going to be needed after all. But the point 
about our committee and our House is that we are today condemning a 
friend, an ally of the United States and we have not had the common 
courtesy to ask Germany to send a representative to our committee to 
answer the charges. That is no way to treat a friend and ally.
  These are very strong charges. Let me quote from the resolution. We 
believe that Germany has ``fostered an atmosphere of intolerance toward 
certain minority religious groups.''
  Given the history of Germany, these are very painful words. These are 
words that we should not be saying lightly. Yet we do without having 
heard from our friends. We claim that the German Government has engaged 
in discrimination and we use the word several times in the resolution.
  First of all, the pain and the process are emphasized in my remarks, 
the pain that we inflict on a friend and the imprecision of the 
process. But note as well that this really does not deal with the high 
concerns that the sponsors wish to suggest. It seems to concern itself 
at least as much with tax-exempt status in Germany, as to which we 
would not welcome German interference in our country.
  I conclude by saying this: To the German Government and to our 
friends around the world who watch what we do today, please understand 
this is not the overwhelming majority. Understand what we do today in 
the final minutes of a session coming to a conclusion is not the 
thoughtful expression of a majority of this House, in my view. It was a 
voice vote in the committee. It will probably be a voice vote again. 
Please note that we are not addressing you in the terms that this 
resolution appears to say, that we are better friends than that.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Becerra].
  (Mr. BECERRA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 22 is about preserving 
religious freedom, plain and simple. I learned the depth of this 
problem when I was introduced to the hardships faced by scientologists 
in Germany. Early in my congressional career about 5 years ago, I met 
with Chick Corea the renowned jazz pianist and learned that he had been 
barred from public performances in Germany. He was set to go, he had 
performances all lined up. All of a sudden he was not granted a visa to 
go into Germany even though most of his performances had already been 
for the most part sold out. At the time I was able to work with a 
number of my colleagues and we put letters together and sent them off 
to the German government protesting such actions.
  Back in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in the future days 
which

[[Page H10515]]

we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon 4 
essential human freedoms. Those freedoms he listed were freedom of 
speech, of expression, of being free from want, and freedom from fear. 
He also told us of the freedom of every person to worship God in his 
own way everywhere in the world. I mention that because just yesterday, 
if Members read the New York Times, there was an article that said a 
Federal immigration court judge in Tampa, Florida, granted asylum to a 
German citizen who was a member of the Church of Scientology. Her 
asylum claim was based on the fact that she would be subjected to 
religious persecution had she returned to Germany.
  Many of my constituents, as I suspect many of your constituents, are 
members of religious minority groups like the Church of Scientology. 
This resolution calls for protecting their rights if and when they 
spend time in Germany. They deserve this protection. German citizens 
themselves who are members of minority religious groups deserve 
religious freedom as well.
  As Members cast their vote on House Concurrent Resolution 22, 
remember the words of President Roosevelt listing religious freedom as 
one of the four essential human freedoms. As he said, freedom of every 
person to worship God in his own way everywhere in the world. Today is 
one of those future days that President Roosevelt spoke of. Today we 
should be standing together to say aye to House Concurrent Resolution 
22.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Houghton], a member of the committee.
  (Mr. HOUGHTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, I feel very uncomfortable supporting this 
measure. I do not know whether the actions of the German Government in 
relationship to the Church of Scientology are right or wrong. I have a 
sense, and this is probably presumptuous for me to say, had I been 
given the decision to make, I might have made it a little differently. 
But that is not the issue. The issue is whether we do not look just a 
bit pompous sitting back here with all our many moral problems in this 
country, to pass judgment on a nation, our friend, which is wrestling 
with something which we ourselves and other nations of this world are 
wrestling with. This is not a Martin Niemoller issue. Please let us 
withhold judgment. I would not support this measure.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Weller].
  (Mr. WELLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, as 
amended, and ask for bipartisan support. This issue is something pretty 
basic for all Americans, about basic American principles and values of 
freedom and religion. I think we all wonder sometimes and think back to 
why the Founding Fathers and Mothers came to our Nation. One of the 
reasons was and is because we practice tolerance and freedom of 
religion, and they came here, our ancestors, to avoid religious 
persecution. It is a pretty basic value for all of us. Germany is our 
ally. It is a first world country. It should be leading the way in 
religious tolerance. But unfortunately, American citizens today are 
being denied the ability to do business in Germany because of their 
religious faith. Whether Members agree with the values and the 
teachings of Islam, or Jehovah's Witnesses, or Charismatic Christians 
or the Church of Scientology, these individuals are being persecuted 
today. That is why this resolution is important. The President should 
be discussing this issue because he should be speaking in behalf of 
Americans who are suffering persecution. Congress must speak. I ask for 
bipartisan support. I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
West Virginia [Mr. Wise].
  Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this 
resolution. If there is discrimination then it should be pointed out, 
but it should be pointed out in all the places it might occur. But here 
efforts are being made to single out Germany. I rise in opposition 
because there are differing views about some of the specific 
allegations. One of the performers that has been mentioned here has 
played in Germany as recently as last year at a function that received 
funding from the State of Bavaria. The movies that have supposedly been 
boycotted indeed have been shown and have been hits in Germany, 
financial successes.
  I rise in opposition because if we are talking about the Church of 
Scientology. Our own country did not grant tax-exempt status to that 
church until 1993. Indeed, there is a long list of nations, Belgium, 
France, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, 
Mexico, Spain that presently decline to grant that same status.
  I rise in opposition because France, Italy, and Greece recently have 
taken actions which could be considered as discrimination in the sense 
they had made rulings against this Church of Scientology, and yet this 
resolution does not mention them.
  Finally, because in a statement by Michael Friedman of the Central 
Council of Jews in Germany, responding to many of the charges made, he 
writes, ``They are totally off the mark. Today we have a democracy in 
Germany and a state based on rule of law.''
  The sponsors have heightened awareness about alleged discrimination 
in many places, but let us not single out an ally with relatively 
unsubstantiated charges. Instead, let us engage and talk to each other 
as the true friends we are. There are American men and women in Bosnia 
today side by side with German men and women holding up an important 
part of our European responsibilities. Germany works with us in so many 
different ways. Let us recognize that and vote this resolution down, at 
the same time urging that discrimination everywhere be pointed out and 
that we deal with it together.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for 
religious freedom and ask my colleagues to support House Concurrent 
Resolution 22.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 22, 
which declares that the Congress holds Germany responsible for 
protecting the rights of United States citizens who are living, doing 
business, or traveling in Germany and deplores the actions of certain 
government officials in Germany which have fostered an atmosphere of 
intolerance toward certain minority religious groups.
  This country was founded on the principles of freedom of religion, 
and in over 200 years of history we have not only survived but thrived.
  This resolutions calls for the President to assert the concern of the 
United States Government against such discrimination; to emphasize that 
the United States regards the human rights practices of the German 
Government as a significant factor in the relationship between the two 
countries; and to encourage other governments to appeal to the 
Government of Germany in efforts to protect the rights of foreign 
citizens and members of minority religious groups in Germany.
  Germany is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the 
Helsinki accords, and is therefore obliged to refrain from religious 
discrimination and to foster a climate of tolerance.
  It is important for the Congress to make its views known with regards 
to human rights by our adversaries, but especially by our allies. 
Religious freedom should be a basic right of all people regardless of 
their faith or nationality.
  I would hope that the people of Germany will take note of the 
peaceful diverse religious community that exists here in this country 
and would reframe from discouraging religious diversity in their own 
nation.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution.
  Thank you.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Arizona [Mr. Pastor].
  (Mr. PASTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, when I first came to this Congress in 
October of 1991, I was approached about trying to do something with 
this issue. I have to tell Members since then to today, things have 
gotten worse for the people

[[Page H10516]]

not only who are in Germany but also for the Americans that travel to 
Germany.
  Mr. Speaker, the issue is, if you are for human rights, you should be 
for this resolution. If you are against religious persecution, you 
should be for this resolution. If you are against the persecution of 
Christians in China, you should be for this resolution. Mr. Speaker, 
there is concern for many of us in this country and we are supporting 
this resolution in a bilingual nature, because we want to show our 
concern that we do not want history to repeat itself in Germany.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
  Mr. GILMAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Latham). The gentleman from New York 
[Mr. Gilman] has 9 minutes remaining and the gentleman from Nebraska 
[Mr. Bereuter] has 11 minutes remaining.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Wolf].
  (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I am troubled and puzzled and disappointed 
that the House tonight has decided to take up this resolution with 
regard to the Church of Scientology in Germany when the House has 
decided not to bring up the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act, a 
bill that I sponsored along with 96 other Members of the House. While 
we are debating this resolution tonight, millions of Christians in 
Tibet, Buddhists in Tibet, Buddhists, Ahmadis in other countries, the 
Baha'is in Iran, Muslims in China and people of other faith are being 
brutalized, killed, raped, tortured and maimed because of their 
beliefs, and yet the House does not deal with this issue and they deal 
with this issue with regard to this resolution.

                              {time}  1800

  There is real life slavery. In Sudan tonight they are going into 
slave markets and taking people out, and the House does not deal with 
that issue, but yet it deals with this issue.
  In Egypt Coptic Christians are being persecuted today as we now 
speak. The House does not deal with that issue, but it deals with this 
issue.
  In closing, I am troubled and puzzled and very disappointed. If we 
are going to take up this resolution tonight, we basically are saying 
these other issues should be taken care of, and they are not being 
taken care of.
  Mr. Speaker, I am troubled and disappointed that the House of 
Representatives has decided to take up the resolution on the 
Scientologists in Germany when the House has decided not to bring up 
the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act, a bill I sponsored with 
Senator Arlen Specter.
  The Freedom from Religious Persecution Act has over 96 bipartisan 
cosponsors and deals with persecution against people of all faiths in 
all countries around the world.
  While we are debating this resolution today, millions of Christians, 
Tibetan Buddhists, Ahmadis, Bahai's, Muslims and other people of faith 
are being brutalized--killed, raped, tortured, and maimed--because of 
their religious belief and practice. Why won't the House speak out for 
them in this first session of the 105th Congress.
  In China, Catholic bishops and priests are in jail and being 
tortured. Protestant pastors and laypeople are in jail and being 
tortured. Tibetan Buddhist monks and nuns are in jail and being 
tortured and killed. In Xinjiang Province in Northwest China, Muslim 
Uighurs are being persecuted.
  In Sudan, 1.2 million people from the South, who are predominately 
Christians and animists, have died in the decade-old conflict. There is 
crucifixion taking place in the Nuba Mountains. Christian women and 
children are kidnapped and sold into slavery.
  I have submitted for the record excerpts from a recent trip report of 
Christian Solidarity International, an international humanitarian 
organization with vast experience in Sudan. On their recent trip, CSI 
representative talked to dozens of women and children and heard of 
their ordeal. They talked with slave traders and visited slave markets.
  One woman, a 20-year old mother, told of her ordeal when she was 
enslaved in May, 1997. She told CSI

       I was sitting in my compound early in the morning when 
     armed men on horseback surrounded my home. they came without 
     warning. I did not try to run away because there was no 
     escape. One of the raiders lashed me and took me away with my 
     child. As we left, I could see the raiders looting everything 
     I owned, and setting my home on fire. I was taken to another 
     village for some hours and was then forced to carry sorghum 
     on my head. When I could walk no further, my captor, took my 
     child and tied her on a horse. [My captor] often insulted me, 
     calling me ``slave'' and he would beat me with a stick. He 
     accused me of being lazy and refusing to obey orders. He used 
     me as a concubine.

  Real life slavery of Christians in Sudan. 1.2 million people have 
died. But the House of Representatives will not speak out for them 
today.
  In Egypt, Coptic Christians are killed, forced to pay ``protection 
money'' to local thugs, harassed and sometimes imprisoned.
  In Pakistan, Christian villages have been burned, devastating the 
lives of tens of thousands. Ahmadi Muslims are being persecuted.
  In Vietnam, Christians and Buddhists are being persecuted.
  And there are many other examples around the world. Why will this 
Congress not take up the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act--a bill 
that would cut off foreign aid to governments that kill, rape, torture, 
enslave or engage in other gross acts of violence against religious 
believers. We should speak out for these religious believers today.
  There was a promise by the speaker to 40 religious leaders in August 
that the bill would be a ``must do'' item. He said ``this is one of the 
top priorities of this Republican Congress.''
  Why take up this resolution to help Scientologists in Germany, but 
not bring up a bill that would help millions of people of faith in 
dozens of other countries around the world?
  The Freedom from Religious Persecution Act is supported by the groups 
representing the vast majority of America's religious believers. It is 
supported by the Southern Baptist Convention, the National Association 
of Evangelicals, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the U.S. 
Catholic Bishop's Conference and the International Campaign for Tibet 
among others.
  It is also supported by the American Coptic Association, the Assyrian 
National Congress, the Catholic Alliance, Christian Coalition, 
Evangelicals for Social Action, Family Research Council, Iranian 
Christians International, National Jewish Coalition, Union of American 
Hebrew Congregations, Pakistani-American Christian Association, World 
Lebanese Organization, World Maronite Union-USA, and the South Sudan 
Community of the U.S.
  In May, over 90 religious leaders wrote to House leadership endorsing 
the measure and I submit that letter in the record. I also submit 
recent letters from the U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference and Rabbi 
David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center for Reform 
Judaism in support of the bill.
  When he met with the religious leaders in August, Speaker Gingrich 
said ``As Speaker of the House, I will continue to use my bully pulpit 
to speak out for those who are unable to speak for themselves.'' Mr. 
Speaker, please use that bully pulpit and your extraordinary power as 
Speaker of the House to bring up the Freedom from Religious Persecution 
Act early in the next session.
  It's puzzling and it's disappointing that this resolution is being 
brought up but the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act is not.

 Draft Preliminary Report: Visit to North-Eastern Bahr El Ghazal, Sudan


                           october 8-12, 1997

                            Slavery in Sudan

       The primary objective of this visit was to develop CSI's 
     work to combat contemporary slavery in Sudan.
       CSI had received various unconfirmed reports of the 
     practice of slavery on early visits to Sudan. But it was not 
     until we visited Nyamlell in Aweil West County briefly in May 
     1995 that we discovered slavery as a flourishing and 
     widespread institution. We learnt that on March 25 1995 the 
     Popular Defense Forces (PDF) of Sudan's ruling National 
     Islamic Front (NIF) regime attacked Nyamlell, killing 82 
     civilians, enslaving 282 women and children; burning 
     dwellings and looting cattle and grain.
       Since then, CSI has returned 8 times to this area and has 
     visited other locations in northern Bahr El Ghazal, such as 
     Malwal Akon in Aweil East County and Turalei in Gogrial 
     County, to obtain further data on slavery. During these fact-
     finding missions, we have interviewed slaves, slave traders, 
     PDF officers and the families of people who are still 
     enslaved. We have accumulated an abundance of evidence to 
     prove beyond doubt that chattel slavery thrives in these 
     parts of Sudan and that the NIF regime actively encourages 
     it. See reports of CSI visits to Sudan: May-June 1995; August 
     1995; October 1995; April-May 1996; June 1996, October-
     November 1996, March 1997 and June 1997. The evidence 
     obtained during this visit amplifies our previous findings 
     about the pattern of the slave trade.
       Interviews with some of the newly redeemed slaves give an 
     indication of their experiences during enslavement.
       (i) Ayen Deng Ding from Akek Rot near Marial Bai. Her 
     village was attacked 4 years

[[Page H10517]]

     ago. When the raiders came, she was in her home with her 10-
     year old daughter Ajok Garang. She saw the horses coming and 
     started to run but she and her little girl were caught by a 
     horseman. She was beaten (she showed us scars on her arms), 
     tied with a rope and taken North to Abu Matarik, where she 
     was handed over to another man. She was separated from her 
     daughter, but they were nearby. When the trader came to 
     negotiate her release, she told him about her daughter and he 
     managed to secure her release also.
       During her 4 years of slavery, she was treated very badly: 
     subjected to beatings while caring for the cattle; she also 
     had to cook, fetch water, carry firewood, wash clothes and 
     work in the garden. She was not given enough food--only 
     leftovers--and was constantly hungry.
       She saw other slaves being beaten, 4 of whom died--3 men 
     and 1 woman. She was raped repeatedly on the forced march 
     north, but her owner only raped her once.
       I lost hope I would ever see my home again, but I just 
     prayed to God. I was so happy when I saw the trader coming, I 
     began to dare to hope. But many other slaves are still left 
     behind.
       She now has only her daughter left; her husband was killed 
     in the raid. She has gone to live with relatives, but she 
     also lives with the fear that the raiders will come again. 
     She asked us to convey this message:
       We are so happy now we are feeling free. Thank you for what 
     you have done for us. The problem remains and there are still 
     people left behind as slaves, but we are comforted because 
     when we saw you we felt you care for us very much. When we 
     arrived here, we were so relieved and happy we had could meet 
     in a secure environment, to engage in politically 
     legitimate activities which are banned by the NIF in the 
     North.
       Expectations had been raised during previous visits of Umma 
     Party representatives and disappointment was expressed over 
     the delay in fulfilling them.
       Several more Arabs expressed similar sentiments, which can 
     be summarized in the words of two of their spokesmen:
       We are the supporters of the Umma Party. We are Ansars, not 
     NIF. We are rivals of the NIF, but the leaders of the Umma 
     Party have been unseen and unheard for a long time. This has 
     enabled the NIF to recruit our people.
       NIF Recruitment Policies: Another spokesman claimed that 
     the training and arming of Arab citizens by the NIF over 4 or 
     5 years has been very intensive. But after receiving the 
     messages from the Umma Party leadership, this has slowed 
     down, although there are still bad elements in society who 
     are tempted by greed still to participate in the raids. 
     Because of their difficulty in recruiting raiders, the NIF 
     are now recruiting school children from about 15 years of age 
     to fight in the PDF. So-called ``co-ordinators'' from the 
     regular Army are used to round up children from schools. 
     There are many children now at the military headquarters at 
     Daien. Airplanes come to take the children away and they are 
     never seen again. All tribes in Darfur are affected. It is 
     Omer El Bashir who gives orders for the rounding up of 
     children. The ones who actually do it are the Security forces 
     and the police, but they are just obeying orders.
       Living Conditions in Darfur: These are very, very bad in 
     Nyala, Daien and other towns. We have no choice but to 
     migrate. Nomads and everyone else are badly affected. A 20-
     litre barrel of fresh drinking water is K3,000 (Sudanese 
     pounds), a portion of bread is K250 (SP), 2cc of penicillin 
     cost K4,000 (SP), while the maximum pay a labourer or clerk 
     is K20-25,000 (SP) per month. A consultation with a doctor, 
     just for diagnoses, not for treatment costs K20,000 (SP).
       Here is proof that life in Darfur is unbearable: I am an 
     old man and I had to walk through water for 7 days carrying 
     heavy loads to trade with the Dinka--this shows just how bad 
     conditions are in Darfur.
       The meeting concluded with a final message from Ali Mahmoud 
     Dudein: Recruitment to the PDF has diminished, because of 
     CSI's work to promote peace and reconciliation. The NIF can 
     still recruit, but not like before.
       We camped overnight at Manyiel.


                           friday, october 10

       We walked on from Manyiel to Majak Bai, the village we 
     visited in June, shortly after it had suffered from a major 
     raid (CSI field trip report of June 1997). During that raid, 
     the school was burnt to the ground. On this occasion we met 
     the headteacher again, Aguek Manjok. He described the 
     situation: there had been 300 children in the school but some 
     disappeared as a result of the raid. During the attack, 
     everything was burnt: the building, all the books and every 
     piece of equipment: there was absolutely nothing left.
       They now urgently need teaching resources for their 
     curriculum of English, Maths, Geography, History, Science, 
     Hygiene and Religious Education, with text books to cover 
     levels P1-8. At present, he said, we can only teach what is 
     in our minds and that is not enough.
       There is also a need for help to send people for teacher 
     training. There is a centre for Aweil West County in Majong 
     Akon.
       NB. The need for professional education/updating was 
     repeated many times. One specific request, which we would 
     support, was made by Simon Kuot, the nurse/medical co-
     ordinator based at Nyamlell. We have seen him at work and 
     been very impressed by the standard of professional 
     competence he displays (e.g. treating the serious casualties 
     from the raids). His area of responsibility is very large and 
     makes many professional demands. We hope it will be possible 
     for to dance. Although we were beaten and humiliated and 
     though there are still problems here, like shortages of 
     medicines, these are not real problems--we can cope with 
     those. We are so happy to be back.
       (ii) Abuk Atak from Panlang near Marial Bai. 3 years ago 
     her village was attacked and she was beaten by an Arab with a 
     gun during the raid. She had her 18-month old daughter with 
     her, but lost her in the raid and has never seen her again. 
     After being taken North, she was sold to Anur Mohammed in Abu 
     Matarik in Southern Darfur. She was raped every day, 
     sometimes many times, by different people; if she did not 
     submit voluntarily, she was beaten. Clearly embarrassed by 
     talking about her ordeals, fidgeting anxiously with dead 
     leaves, she said she had been subjected to circumcision. But 
     she would talk about it because ``I can't deny the facts. We 
     were subjected to torture and suffering and I can't deny our 
     humiliation.''
       She never thought she would be able to come home again and 
     during those 3 years she lost all hope. But now she is home, 
     she said: We were left with nothing after the raids; we lost 
     our homes, our crops were burnt, our cattle stolen, we have 
     not even any clothes . . . but there is no problem which we 
     cannot endure.
       (iii) Acol Bak, aged 12 from Panlang, who assured us at the 
     outset that she was not afraid to talk about here 
     experiences. 4 years ago she was at home in the early 
     morning; Arabs suddenly appeared and she was surrounded by 
     horses. He mother managed to escape but she and her elder 
     brother were caught and taken to Gross near Abu Matarik. She 
     doesn't know what happened to her brother. On the walk North 
     she was forced to carry looted property on her head; they 
     were given no water and could only drink from muddy puddles; 
     neither were they given any food during the 3-day forced 
     march. She was beaten and her right arm was broken. She was 
     forced to do housework from morning until night and beaten by 
     all the family if she ever complained of tiredness. She had 
     to sleep outside with no bedding, just trying to keep warm by 
     a fire. One month after her arrival in her owner's home, an 
     old woman came to circumcise her. She was told that unless 
     she was circumcised she would not be a human being; she would 
     be just ``like a dog''. She knew other girls who had also 
     been circumcised.
       She said she was very, very happy to be home again and for 
     the people who brought her back. She is living only with her 
     mother as her father had been killed in the raid and her 
     brother has not been found.
       (iv) Acol Anei Bak from Panlang was caught by surprise when 
     the enemy attacked her village 4 years ago, when she was 
     about 8 years old. Her brother, aged about 12, was caught at 
     the same time and she does not know what happened to him. She 
     was taken to Pielel, near Nyala, where she was sold to a man 
     called Amsal Abrahaman. She was forced to help to care for 
     the 5 children in the family, especially with washing them, 
     and to look after cattle and horses. The children were very 
     unfriendly and would not speak to her. She was circumcised, 
     and told that this was being done to her because the owner 
     wanted her to be an Arab.
       (v) Ayen Ding Yel from Akek Rot near Marial Bai was 
     captured in May this year. She showed us her foot which was 
     injured when a horse trod on it during the raid; she was also 
     shot and showed us the scar caused by the bullet which 
     injured her left knee. She was initially left behind, after 
     she was injured, but then another Arab put her on his horse 
     and took her to Abu Matarik. She was badly treated and beaten 
     whenever she asked for food. Her owner asked her why she 
     needed food--saying she did not deserve food. She said she 
     never dreamt that she would be free again and that her mother 
     was overjoyed to see her yesterday.
       (vi) Nyibol Yel Akuei is a 20-year old mother. Three of her 
     children have starved to death. Her only surviving child is a 
     one-year-old daughter, Abuk. The mother and daughter were 
     enslaved during the PDF raid on Majak Bai on May 16, 1997. 
     Nyibol explained what had happened to them: I was sitting in 
     my compound early in the morning when armed men on horseback 
     surrounded my home. They came without any warning. I did not 
     try to run away because there was no escape. One of the 
     raiders lashed me and took me away with my child. As we left, 
     I could see the raiders looting everything I owned, and 
     setting my home on fire. I was taken to another village for 
     some hours and then was forced to carry sorghum on my head. 
     When I got tired and could not walk further, my captor, 
     Mahmoud Abaker, took my child and tied her on a horse. I 
     walked for seven days to Abu Matarik. There, I had to work 
     from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 pm. My jobs were to carry water 
     from the pump, clean the compound and wash clothing. 
     Mahoud Abaker often insulted me, calling me ``slave'' and 
     he would beat me with a stick. He accused me of being lazy 
     and refusing to obey orders. He also used me as a 
     concubine. Mahmoud Abaker told me that I should practice 
     Muslim prayers. I had trouble praying in Arabic, so they 
     gave me some training. Abuk was renamed Miriam. I was not 
     allowed to go far from the compound. Mahmoud Abaker may 
     have had other slaves at his cattle camp, but I never saw 
     them. He had no other slaves in the

[[Page H10518]]

     compound. One day, I was told to leave the compound with a 
     trader. I was afraid to go. They told me I would go back 
     to southern Sudan. I didn't believe them, but went anyway. 
     I was very happy to see you and to find that you spoke 
     nicely to us and are not going to do something terrible to 
     us. My husband is now away trying to find food. When he 
     comes back we will find a new place to live.
       (vii) 11-year-old War Weng is also from Majak Bai. He was 
     enslaved in 1994 when he was fishing with his father. A group 
     of raiders came and snatched him, while his father managed to 
     run away. He recalled his life as both the chattel slave of a 
     master and a inmate in a radical Islamic youth indoctrination 
     centre: I was taken to Daien by Musa Osman. My jobs there 
     were to clear cattle dung and take the calves to the river. I 
     received only left-overs to eat and sour milk to drink. After 
     a year or so, I was taken from Musa Osman to a big camp in 
     the town where you can see the light even at night. There 
     were big lights over the compound. There were a lot of boys 
     in this compound. All of them were Dinka boys. We all were 
     given uniforms. This compound was run by the Salsabil 
     organisation. (War Weng was wearing a uniform with the 
     Salsabil logo). Every morning we would wake up early and 
     gather in one place to pray. Then we were taught the Koran 
     for the rest of the morning. At about mid-day we were given 
     food and allowed to rest. From 3:00 until the evening there 
     was more learning. The most important teacher there was Abdel 
     Rahman. None of us were allowed to speak Dinka. We had to 
     speak Arabic all the time. I was beaten for speaking Dinka 
     with my friends. One day, one of the teachers told me and 
     three others to go to the river with a man and his horses. I 
     thought he was going to take us to a new master. Instead he 
     brought us back home. I did not like the camp. It is very 
     good to be back here. Now I am not beaten. I expect to go 
     back to my father. He has already visited me one and given me 
     some food.
       (viii) Atoc Diing is about 11 or 12 years old. She was 
     enslaved during the raid on Majak Bai last May. She 
     recounted:
       We heard gunfire early in the morning. My Mother said run 
     quickly. We ran towards the river. When we got there, we 
     found Arabs all around us. We couldn't run anymore. My Mother 
     stopped and started to cry. One of the raiders came towards 
     us and beat my mother. She fell down. I was taken away and 
     put on horseback. I was taken from place to place before we 
     reached Abu Matarik. There, my captor, Ali Abdullah sold be 
     to another. After four days, I was sold again to another man. 
     His name was Mohammed. He took me to his home in the small 
     village of Gumbilai, near Abu Matarik. I had to fetch water 
     and firewood, and clean. They gave me milk to drink everyday, 
     but some days they gave me no food at all. The young sons of 
     Mohammed were very rough with me. They would beat me, and 
     they tried to have sex with me. But they did not succeed. 
     Mohammed has many slaves. Most of them were in the cattle 
     camp. He has three female slaves at his house. Now that I am 
     back, I will go to live with my sister. My father is dead, 
     and my mother went North to look for me and has not yet 
     returned.
       Interview with casualty of the PDF's May 1997 raid on Majak 
     Bai, the 28-year-old mother, Adel Lake. She was evacuated by 
     CSI to the ICRC hospital in Lokichokio in Kenya last June. 
     The ICRC was not able to evacuate her because the NIF regime 
     has suspended its operations inside Sudan since November 
     1996. This has meant that thousands of casualties have died 
     slowly, painfully and needlessly from easily treatable 
     wounds. Adel Lake returned to Bahr El Ghazal with her health 
     restored while we were there. She told us:
       When the enemy came we were in our tukul. We heard 
     gunshots. I picked up my twin one-month-old babies and ran 
     away to hide. I could not also carry by three-year-old son, 
     Wek Wol, and he was left behind. I hid in the bushes together 
     with my sister-in-law and some other people. The Arab 
     soldiers spotted us and started firing their guns. Everything 
     was in a mess and confused. I was show in the leg and lost 
     consciousness. When I regained consciousness, I could not 
     walk. The bullet had badly fractured my thigh. I was 
     horrified to find that my tukul had been burnt down, and 
     that my son, who had remained inside, had been burnt 
     alive. I also discovered that my sister-in-law had been 
     shot dead. I was weak and sick for many weeks after being 
     shot. I was in a lot of pain and could not look after my 
     babies by myself. I did not believe that help would come. 
     I thought I would never get better. When you came and 
     found me in my bed I felt very happy and believed that you 
     would do something to help me. At the hospital, they made 
     my leg better. The wound and fracture is healed, but I 
     still feel some pain. Please give my greetings to all of 
     those who helped me.


  Saturday, October 11, departed Nyamlell and arrived in Malwal Akon; 
                       Interviews with ex-slaves

       (i) Mabior Aguik Deng From Kurwech, near Warawar, aged 
     about 12, was taken when he was much younger and sold to an 
     owner called Mohammed. He was forced to work as a cattle 
     herder; given very little food; had to sleep under a plastic 
     sheet at night. The worst thing about being a slave was being 
     taken away from his family and not seeing them for such a 
     long time. He was saved by a trader and returned to his home 
     in September.
       (ii) Mahid Kuot Mou from the village of Kurwech. When the 
     PDF came with their horses, he tried to hide but was caught 
     and bound and forced to go `footing' for many days, during 
     which they were given very little food and water. He was sold 
     to another owner whose name was Abdullah. He was forced to 
     look after cattle, and lashed if he made any mistakes. He had 
     to sleep under a plastic sheet at night and given only 
     sorghum to eat. He was beaten with bamboo sticks which was 
     very painful. He was given the name of Mohammed. He also had 
     to collect the water. When he went out to collect the water, 
     the local boys were very cruel to him. They used to force him 
     to crawl and rode on his back, calling him a horse. When he 
     was returned by the trader, some relatives recognized him and 
     took him home. They were very, very happy to see him and 
     celebrated his return by killing a chicken.
       (iii) Yak Mawien Yak from the village of Rum Marial. When 
     he heard the enemy coming, he ran away to hid with his father 
     but his father was killed. Looking down at the ground, he 
     spoke reluctantly about this:
       The enemy slaughtered my father with knives. They took me 
     to the horses after beating me. During the beating they asked 
     me where other people were and I said there was only my 
     father around. We spent two days walking to the Arab area and 
     the owner of the horses kept me and made me work for him.
       The raider who killed his father and took him with him 
     said: I am now you father and now you are my enemy; so if you 
     do not take my advice and come with me I will kill you; 
     otherwise you can become my son.
       He slept in the same shelters as the goats and sheep, he 
     was only given uncooked sorghum to eat; one day another local 
     boy attacked him with a knife and wounded him (he showed us 
     his scar); a small girl came to help him. If his owner 
     shouted for him and he did not hear him, the owner would beat 
     him with a stick, calling him stupid. He was forced to walk 
     long distances to collect water and to pound grain. He was 
     given the name of Mahmoud after being forced to pray in a 
     mosque. All slaves are forced to go and pray in a mosque, he 
     said. He was away from home for seven years and almost forgot 
     about his own family. But, he said, with a very big smile, he 
     is very, very happy to be back with them.
       (iv) Yak Deng Yak from the village of Warawar. His family's 
     original herd of cattle had been stolen by Arab raiders, and 
     the family was in such difficult circumstances that he was 
     going with his mother to seek help from the UN in Meiram. On 
     the Meiram. On the way they were captured in an ambush by 
     Arab raiders. He was separated from his mother and taken to 
     an Arab village. A girl used to steal `good food' for him. 
     When the people saw that the girl was friendly with him they 
     sent him to work in the field where he had to cultivate 
     ground nuts and to sleep on his own. He was given sorghum and 
     water and some days he was beaten with a stick. His owner was 
     called Ibrahim, who forced him to attend the mosque; if he 
     did not `do properly' in the mosque he was beaten. He has 
     been away from home for four years until an Arab came and 
     bought him. His mother was also in the same area and 
     recruiting our men into the PDF. But that was now over one 
     year ago. We want to have more frequent contact with our 
     leaders in the Umma Party. Please convey our warmest 
     greetings to Sayeed Sadiq El Mahdi and Mubarak El Fadil.
                                                                    ____



                             International Campaign for Tibet,

                                                      May 6, 1997.
     Hon. Arlen Specter,
     Hon. Frank R. Wolf,
     U.S. Congress.
       Dear Senator Specter and Representative Wolf: I write to 
     thank you for your joint initiative in the Congress to 
     address the absence of religious freedom in Tibet and 
     elsewhere in the world, ``The Freedom from Religious 
     Persecution Act of 1997.''
       When the Chinese army entered Tibet in 1950 to ``liberate'' 
     the people from a lamaist theocracy and to install a 
     socialist atheistic state in its place, the primary target 
     for eradication was the Tibetan Buddhist culture. More than 
     six thousand monasteries, the great learning centers of a 
     religious tradition that spanned much of Asia and 
     repositories of precious scriptures and artifacts were razed 
     to the ground. Monks and nuns were forced to disavow their 
     faith and undertake acts of unspeakable cruelty. Those who 
     could escape their oppressors risked their lives crossing the 
     frozen passes of the Himalayas in flight to freedom in exile.
       Today in Tibet, monks and nuns are still targeted as agents 
     of the old regime. Communist cadres have taken the place of 
     learned geshes, doctors of theology, in the monastic 
     schooling of young novices, and the Chinese propaganda 
     machine continues to spew out vituperative attacks against 
     His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Nonetheless, the Tibetan people 
     cling to their faith, for it is inextricably linked to their 
     very identity as Tibetans.
       I believe that the Congress will support your legislation 
     because Americans, through succeeding generations, have been 
     guided by a deep sense of spirituality, tolerance for their 
     neighbors, and faith in fundamental human rights. The 
     International Campaign for Tibet looks forward to working 
     with your staff to move this legislation to successful 
     passage.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Lodi G. Gyari,
                                                        President.

[[Page H10519]]

     
                                                                    ____
     Hon. Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.

     Hon. Richard Gephardt,
     House Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.

     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Senate Majority Leader,
     Washington, DC.

     Hon. Thomas Daschle,
     Senate Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Gingrich, Senators Lott and Daschle, and 
     Representative Gephardt: Millions of Americans--of differing 
     religious, ethnic and political persuasions--are coalescing 
     behind a Movement of Conscience against religious persecution 
     overseas,
       The recently concluded MFN vote was but an opening chapter 
     of that Movement, one we believe central to America's 
     character and vital national interests. All Americans are 
     shocked by the official Chinese newspaper dispatch that first 
     noted how churches ``played an important role in the change 
     [in Eastern Europe]'' and then urged that ``[i]f China does 
     not want such a scene to be repeated in its land, it must 
     strangle the baby while it is still in the manger.'' The 
     anti-faith persecutions of China's regime have followed the 
     above script and similarly abhorrent persecutions are being 
     committed by other regimes elsewhere in the world.
       We urge Congress to take comprehensive action that will 
     impose prohibitive costs on countries involved in widespread 
     and ongoing persecutions of vulnerable communities of faith. 
     As such we strongly urge support for the following consensus 
     principles:
       Legislation should be directed against the regimes formally 
     condemned by the 104th Congress for anti-faith persecutions, 
     and should contain mechanisms to deal with all regimes 
     engaged in such conduct;
       Hearings on such omnibus anti-religious persecution 
     legislation should begin no later than September, 1997; and
       Floor action on such legislation should take place by early 
     November, since the Day of Prayer for the Persecuted church 
     will be conducted in tens of thousands of American churches 
     on November 6, 1997.
       We believe that the above principles will send the 
     strongest possible signal to all regimes now operating as if 
     hunting licenses were in effect against vulnerable 
     communities of faith. We believe that these principles will 
     avoid piecemeal treatment of the issues raised by today's 
     growing Movement of Conscience against worldwide anti-
     religious persecution. We believe that the principles will 
     ensure that the world hears the cries of persecuted 
     Christians and other believers in China and in Vietnam, Saudi 
     Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Indonesia and other like 
     countries--and hears as well the cries now rising from the 
     unspeakable actions taking place in Sudan. Finally, we 
     believe that the principles will unite all Americans behind a 
     national policy based on universally recognized rights and 
     freedoms.
       In this regard, we believe that the Wolf-Specter bill 
     provides the framework around which the coming debate should 
     occur. We note the broad, bipartisan support enjoyed by the 
     Wolf-Specter bill, and believe that its provisions would have 
     a powerful effect in curbing today's persecutions. We wish to 
     make clear that some of the bill's provisions may need to be 
     strengthened, and many of us may work to do so. At the same 
     time, we write to make clear that the critical need for 
     omnibus legislation requires that any legislation pertaining 
     to global religious persecution should be incorporated into 
     the Wolf-Specter hearing process and framework.
       We would greatly appreciate your joint assurances that 
     hearings and committee votes on Wolf-Specter will be 
     scheduled so as to permit full debate and action on it before 
     the end of the year.
       Each of us has made it a matter of conscience to Shatter 
     the Silence that in the past has sadly accompanied the 
     persecution of believers around the world. Doing so, and 
     joining in campaigns of education, action and prayer on 
     behalf of the residents of today's gulags of faith, is for us 
     a matter of simple justice we are determined and honor-bound 
     to make happen.
       We pray and believe that you and all Members of Congress 
     will help lead this historic effort, doing so with the same 
     force and unity that made the Jackson-Vanik legislation and 
     the campaign against Soviet anti-Semitism the force it became 
     for the freedom of all.
       We look forward to meeting with you at your earliest 
     convenience to discuss these matters.
         Don Argue, Ed.D., President, National Association of 
           Evangelicals, Member, State Department Advisory 
           Committee on Religious Liberty Abroad; William L. 
           Armstrong, Former Senator; Joel Belz, World Magazine; 
           Chaplain Curt Bowers, Director, Chaplaincy Ministries, 
           Church of the Nazarene; Dr. Paul F. Bubna, President, 
           The Christian and Missionary Alliance; Dr. Joseph 
           Aldrich, Multnomah School of the Bible; Gary L. Bauer, 
           President, Family Research Council; William Bennett, 
           Empower America; Dr. William R. Bright, Founder, Campus 
           Crusade for Christ International; Dr. Tony Campolo, 
           Eastern College; Chuck Colson, Chairman of the Board, 
           Prison Fellowship Ministries; The Rev. John Eby, 
           National Coordinator, American Baptist Evangelicals; 
           Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, Founder/President, 
           International Fellowship of Christians and Jews; Dr. 
           David Englehard, General Secretary, Christian Reformed 
           Church; Rev. Jeff Farmer, General Superintendent, Open 
           Bible Standard Churches; Dr. James C. Dobson, Founder, 
           Focus on the Family; The Rev. Janet Roberts Echols, 
           Great Commission Alliance; Dr. Thomas D. Elliff, 
           President, Southern Baptist Convention; Rev. Bernard J. 
           Evans, General Overseer, Elim Fellowship; Dr. Edward L. 
           Foggs, General Secretary, Leadership Council, Church of 
           God, Anderson, IN; Rev. Cecil Johnson, General 
           Overseer, Church of God, Mountain Assembly; Mrs. Diane 
           Knippers, President, Institute on Religion and 
           Democracy; James M. Kushiner, Executive Director, 
           Fellowship of St. James; Dr. Richard D. Land, Chairman/
           Christian Life Commission, Southern Baptist Convention; 
           Dr. Don Lyon, Senior Pastor, Faith Center, Rockford, 
           IL, Board Member, National Association of Evangelicals; 
           Dr. D. James Kennedy, Senior Pastor, Coral Ridge 
           Presbyterian Church; Rev. Richard W. Kohl, Presiding 
           Bishop, Evangelical Congregational Church; Mrs. Beverly 
           LaHaye, Chairman and Founder, Concerned Women for 
           America; William C. Larson, Executive Minister, Iowa 
           Baptist Conference; Rev. Stephen Macchia, President, 
           Vision New England; Dr. Kevin W. Mannoia, Bishop, Free 
           Methodist Church of North America; Steven McFarland, 
           Director, Center for Law and Religious Freedom, 
           Christian Legal Society; Rev. Dr. Daniel Mercaldo, 
           Senior Pastor, Gateway Cathedral, New York; Dr. John P. 
           Moran, President, Missionary Church, Inc.; Dr. Marlin 
           Mull, General Director of Evangelism and Growth, The 
           Wesleyan Church; Mr. Martin J. Mawyer, President, 
           Christian Action Network; Bishop George D. McKinney, 
           Saint Stephen's Cogic; Dr. Juan Carlos Miranda, 
           President, Hispanic Educational Association; Mr. Pedro 
           C. Moreno, Attorney, International Coordinator, The 
           Rutherford Institute; Mr. William J. Murray, Chairman, 
           Religious Freedom Coalition; Dr. Richard John Neuhaus, 
           President, The Institute on Religion and Public Life; 
           Michael Novak, George Frederick Jewett Chair in 
           Religion and Public Policy, American Enterprise 
           Institute; Mr. Ralph Reed, Jr.; Rev. David E. Ross, 
           Executive Director, Advent Christian General 
           Conference; Rev. Michael Scanlan, T.O.R., President, 
           Franciscan University of Steubenville; Mr. Frank 
           Nicodem, Sr., Executive Vice President, Christian 
           Association of Primetimers; Lenox G. Palin, Pastor, 
           Calvary Bible Church, Neenah, WI, Board Member, 
           National Association of Evangelicals; Fr. Keith 
           Roderick, Secretary General, Coalition for the Defense 
           of Human Rights Under Islamization; David Runnion-
           Bareford, Executive Director, Biblical Witness 
           Fellowship, Confessing Movement Within the United 
           Church of Christ; Bishop Ray A. Seilhamer, Bishop, 
           Church of United Brethren in Christ.
         Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, Traditional Values Coalition; 
           Ronald J. Sider, President, Evangelicals for Social 
           Action; Bishop Chester M. Smith, General 
           Superintendent, Congregational Holiness Church, Inc; 
           Rev. Steven L. Snyder, President, International 
           Christian Concern; Marc D. Stern, Co-Director, 
           Commission on Law and Social Action, American Jewish 
           Congress; L. Faye Short, Director, RENEW Network; Dr. 
           Robert L. Simonds, President, Citizens for Excellence 
           in Education; Ken Smitherman, LL.D., President, 
           Association of Christian Schools International; The Rt. 
           Rev. James M. Stanton, Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of 
           Dallas, Texas, President, American Anglican Council; 
           Dr. Jack Stone, General Secretary, Church of the 
           Nazarenc; Rev. Mr. Keith A. Fournier, Esq, President, 
           Catholic Alliance; Robert P. George, Department of 
           Politics, Princeton University; Scott M. Gibson, 
           President, American Baptist Evangelicals; Mr. Jerry 
           Goodman, Founding Executive Director, National 
           Conference on Soviet Jewry; Cheryl Halpern, National 
           Chairman, National Jewish Coalition; Mrs. Diana L. Gee, 
           General Director, Dept. Of Women's Ministries, 
           Pentecostal Church of God; Dwight L. Gibson, North 
           American Director, World Evangelical Fellowship; Anne 
           Giminez, Co-Pastor, Rock Church, Virginia Beach, VA, 
           Board Member, National Association of Evangelicals, 
           Lodi G. Gyari, President, International Campaign for 
           Tibet; Rev. William J. Hamel, President, Evangelical 
           Free Church of America; The Rev. Walter W. Hannum, 
           Founder, The Episcopal Church Missionary Community; Dr. 
           James Henry, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church, 
           Orlando, FL, Former President, Southern Baptist 
           Convention, Member, State Department Advisory Committee 
           on Religious Liberty Abroad; Donald Hodel, Christian 
           Coalition; Rev. Clyde M. Hughes, General Oversecr, 
           International Pentecostal Church of Christ; Bradley P. 
           Jacob, Associate Dean, Geneva School

[[Page H10520]]

           of Law; Dr. Jack W. Hayford, Senior Pastor, Church on 
           the Way; Professor Russell Hittinger, Warren Chair of 
           Catholic Studies, The University of Tulsa; Warren L. 
           Hoffman, General Secretary, Brethren in Christ Church; 
           Ray H. Hughes, Chairman, Pentecostal World Conference; 
           Dr. B. Edgar Johnson, Northwest Nazarene College; Dr. 
           Joseph M. Stowell III, President, Moody Bible 
           Institute; Thomas E. Trask, General Superintendent, 
           General Council of the Assemblies of God; Dr. R. Lamar 
           Vest, First Assistant General Overseer, Church of Good, 
           Cleveland, TN; Rev. Jack W. Wease, General 
           Superintendent, Evangelical Methodist Church; Bishop 
           Donald W. Wuerl, Diocese of Pittsburgh; Mr. Joseph 
           Tkach, President, Worldwide Church of God; Rev. Albert 
           Vander Meer, Synod Minister, Synod of Mid-America, 
           Reformed Church in America; Commissioner Robert A. 
           Watson, National Commander, The Salvation Army; The 
           Rev. Todd H. Wetzel, Executive Director, Episcopalians 
           United; Rev. Wayne L. Yarnell, Executive Director, 
           Primitive Methodist Church in the USA; Dr. Ravi 
           Zacharias, Founder, Ravi Zacharias International 
           Ministries.
                                                                    ____


      Testimony of Tsultrim Dolma, Victim of Religious Persecution

       My name is Tsultrim Dolma. I am 28 years old. I am one of 
     the one thousand Tibetan refugees who came to the United 
     States through the Tibetan Resettlement Program, authorized 
     by the United States Congress in 1991.
       I never imagined that I would someday testify before you 
     esteemed gentlemen and gentleladies. Now that I am here, I 
     feel it is both a privilege and responsibility to tell you 
     about my experiences--among the thousands of Tibetans who 
     flee into exile, very few have their stories heard.
       I am not an educated person, I don't know about politics. 
     But I do know what it is to live under Chinese rule. And I 
     know, although I was born after the Chinese came into Tibet, 
     that Tibet is different than China.
       I have asked my friend Dorje Dolma to read the rest of my 
     testimony because my English is not very good.
       I was born in Pelbar Dzong, Tibet, near Chamdo which prior 
     to the Chinese invasion in 1949 was the easternmost 
     administrative center of the Dalai Lama's government. For as 
     long as I can remember, I yearned to become a nun. It was 
     difficult for me to pursue my studies because the nunnery 
     near my village had been completely destroyed during the 
     Cultural Revolution.
       I took my nun's vow at age 17 and, soon after, left my home 
     with a small group of villagers to make the customary 
     pilgrimage to Lhasa, the capital and spiritual center of 
     Tibet, and a month's journey from my home. Once there was 
     able to join the Chupsang nunnery on the outskirts of the 
     city.
       In Lhasa it was unavoidable to feel the tension due to the 
     large differences between the Tibetans and Chinese living 
     there, and within a year, on October 1, 1987, China's 
     National Day, I experienced at first hand the consequences of 
     that tension.
       On that day, monks from Sera and Nechung Monasteries 
     peacefully demonstrated for the release of their imprisoned 
     brothers. Hundreds of Tibetans gathered around in support. 
     Public Security Bureau Police moved through the crowd 
     videotaping demonstrators. Then, unexpectedly, opened fire on 
     the crowd. The Tibetans responded by throwing stones at the 
     cameras, but a number of monks were arrested and dragged to 
     the Police station.
       I joined a large group that converged on the station. We 
     heard gun shots from the rooftop and tried to get inside, but 
     the police fired down into the crowd. Many Tibetans were 
     killed and many other badly injured. Outraged at the 
     massacre, some Tibetans set fire to the building. I watched 
     as Venerable Jampa Tenzin the caretaker of the Jokhang 
     Temple, led a charge into the building to try to free the 
     monks. When he emerged about ten minutes later, his arms were 
     badly burned and had long pieces of skin peeling off. Two 
     young novice monks came out with him and were also badly 
     burned. Soon afterwards, Jampa Tenzin was arrested and 
     detained at Sangyip Prison where he is known to have 
     undergone severe ill-treatment.
       The Great Monlam Prayer Festival which occurred the 
     following spring was the next occasion for major protest. 
     Chinese authorities had ordered the monks of all of Lhasa's 
     monasteries to attend, as they had invited journalists from 
     many different countries to film the ceremony as an example 
     of religious freedom in Tibet. The monks of Sera, Drepung, 
     Ganden and Nechung decided to boycott the ceremony, but were 
     forced to attend at gun point. Under guard, the monks made 
     the traditional circumambulation around the Jokhang, Lhasa's 
     central cathedral.
       After completing the ceremony, those monks joined together 
     in calling out loudly to Tibetan officials working for the 
     Chinese government who were watching the ceremony from a 
     stage next to the Jokhang. They demanded the release of the 
     highly revered incarnate lama, Yulo Dawa Tsering, who had 
     been arrested some months before and of whom nothing had been 
     heard. One of the official's bodyguards then fired at the 
     demonstrators, killing one Tibetan. A riot ensued and the 
     army proceeded to fire into the crowd. Soldiers chased a 
     large number of monks into the Jokhang and clubbed 30 of them 
     to death.
       Eighteen lay Tibetans were also killed in the cathedral. 
     Twelve other monks were shot. Two monks were strangled to 
     death, and an additional eight lay Tibetans were killed 
     outside the cathedral. The news of the deaths spread 
     throughout the city.
       After we saw the terror and turmoil in the streets, some 
     nuns from my Ani Gompa and I decided to demonstrate in order 
     to support our heroic brothers and sisters in Lhasa, 
     particularly the monks who had been arrested and are in 
     prison and whose cases even now have not been settled. On 
     April 16, about six weeks after the massacre during Monlam, 
     four of us demonstrated for their release and the release of 
     women and children. We felt the Chinese were trying to 
     destroy all the patriotic Tibetans in prison by maltreating 
     them. The Chinese government has publicized that there is 
     freedom of religion in Tibet, but in fact, the genuine 
     pursuit of our religion is a forbidden freedom. So many 
     difficult restrictions are placed on those entering monastic 
     life, and spies are planted everywhere.
       My sister nuns and I were joined by two nuns from Gari 
     Gompa and we were all six arrested in the Barkhor while 
     shouting out demands. As we stood on the holy walk of 
     Barkhor, we were approached by eight Chinese soldiers who 
     spread out and grabbed us. Two soldiers took me roughly by 
     the arms, twisting my hands behind by back. Two of the nuns, 
     Tenzin Wangmo and Gyaltsen Lochoe, were put in a Chinese 
     police jeep and driven away. The rest of us were thrown into 
     a truck and taken to the main section of Gutsa prison, about 
     three miles east of Lhasa.
       When we arrived, we were separated and taken into various 
     rooms. I was pushed into a room where one male and one female 
     guard were waiting. They removed the belt which held my nuns 
     robe and it fell down as they searched my pockets. While I 
     was searched, the guards slapped me hard repeatedly and 
     yanked roughly on my nose and ears.
       After the search, I was led outside to another building 
     where two different male and female guards waited to begin 
     the interrogation. ``What did you say in the Barkhor? Why did 
     you say it?'' The cell contained a variety of torture 
     implements: lok-gyug, electric cattle prods, and metal rods. 
     I was kicked and fiercely beaten as I was interrogated until 
     mid-day, and then pulled to my feet and taken to the prison 
     courtyard where I saw the three other nuns from Chupsang.
       We were made to stand in four directions. I was near the 
     door so that every Chinese soldier who passed by would kick 
     me in passing. Our hands were uncuffed and we were told to 
     stand with our hands against the wall as six policemen took 
     each one in turn, held us down and beat us with electric 
     prods and a small, broken chair and kicked us. Gyaltsen 
     Lochoe was kicked in the face. I was kicked in the chest so 
     hard that I could hardly breath. We were told to raise our 
     hands in the air, but it was not possible to stay in that 
     position and we kept falling down. As soon as I fell, someone 
     would come and force me up. We were constantly questioned 
     regarding who else was involved in arranging the 
     demonstration.
       All during the interrogation, we were not allowed to fasten 
     our belts and so our robes kept slipping off. We would 
     constantly try to lift them and adjust them. I tried to think 
     of what I could possibly say to answer the questions. ``How 
     did you choose that day? Who was behind you?'' I could only 
     see feet. Many different pairs of feet approaching us through 
     the day. We were repeatedly kicked and beaten. ``The 
     Americans are helping you! Where are they now? They will 
     never help you! Because you have opposed communism, you are 
     going to die!''
       After some hours had passed, a large dog with pointed ears 
     and black and white spots was brought in, led on a heavy 
     chain. The police tried to force us to run, but we simply did 
     not have the strength. The dog looked at us with interest, 
     but did not approach.
       Finally, as sunset approached, we were handcuffed and taken 
     into a building and made to walk through the hallway two by 
     two. Here and there were small groups of Chinese soldiers on 
     both sides of the corridor. As we passed, we were punched and 
     kicked, slapped and pulled hard by the ears. My cell, 
     measuring five feet by five feet, was empty except for a slop 
     basin and small bucket. That night, I quickly passed out on 
     the cold cement floor.
       The following morning, I was taken to a room where three 
     police were seated behind a table. On its surface was an 
     assortment of rifles, electric prods and iron rods. I was 
     told ``Look down!'' Throughout my detention, I was never 
     allowed to look straight at their faces. While answering I 
     had to look to the side or face down.
       One of them asked me ``Why did you demonstrate? Why are you 
     asking yourself for torture and beatings?'' My knees began to 
     shake. I told them: ``Many monks, nuns and lay people have 
     been arrested, but we know Tibet belongs to the Tibetans. You 
     say there is freedom of religion, but there is no genuine 
     freedom!'' My answer angered them and the three got up from 
     behind the table, picking up various implements. One picked 
     up an electric rod and hit me with it. I fell down.
       They shouted at me to stand, but I couldn't and so one 
     pulled up my robe and the other man inserted the instrument 
     into

[[Page H10521]]

     my vagina. The shock and the pain were horrible. He repeated 
     this action several times and also struck other parts of my 
     body. Later the others made me stand and hit me with sticks 
     and kicked me. Several times I fell to the floor. They would 
     then force the prod inside of me and pull me up to repeat the 
     beatings.
       For some reason I began to think of a precious herb that 
     grows in Tibet called Yartsa Gunbu. Tibetans believe it is a 
     cross between the kingdoms of plants and animals because 
     during the summer it gives the appearance of being a worm. 
     This medicine herb is quite rare. In my region, the Chinese 
     force a monthly quota on each monk and nun which consists of 
     thousands and thousands of such plants. I shouted out: 
     ``Before 1959, it was considered a sin for monks to pick the 
     Yartsa Gunbu! It was a sin, and you have forced them to do 
     it!''
       I remained in detention for more than four months. For the 
     first month, I was beaten every morning during the 
     interrogations. For the first several days, different levels 
     of authorities came to my cell. At first I was afraid but as 
     time went by and I thought about the monks, and other men and 
     women who were imprisoned, many of whom had families to worry 
     about, I began to realize I had nothing to lose. My parents 
     could lead their lives by themselves.
       I was continuously terrified of possible sexual 
     molestation. But as the days went by, that did not occur. 
     Sitting in my cell, I would remind myself that I was there 
     because I had spoken on behalf of the people of Tibet and I 
     felt proud that I had accomplished a goal and was able to say 
     what I thought was right.
       In Gutsa prison in the summer of 1988, there were all 
     together about 32 nuns and lay women. All the women were kept 
     in the ward for political prisoners. During that time, one of 
     the nuns, Sonam Chodon, was sexually molested.
       Fifteen days after my release from prison on August 4, 
     1988, a Tibetan approached me and asked if my sister nuns and 
     I would like to talk to a British journalist who was secretly 
     making a documentary in Tibet. We all felt to appear in the 
     interview without hiding our faces was the best way to make a 
     contribution. The ultimate truth would soon be known so there 
     was no need to hide. We had truth as our defense.
       After our release from prison, we were formally expelled 
     from Chupsang by the Chinese authorities and sent back to our 
     villages. We were not allowed to wear nuns robes and were 
     forbidden to take part in religious activities. We were not 
     allowed to talk freely with other villagers. I was forced to 
     attend nightly re-education meetings during which the topic 
     of conversation often came around to me as ``a member of the 
     small splittist Dalai clique which is trying to separate the 
     motherland.'' I was so depressed and confused.
       I never told my parents what had happened in prison. When 
     word came of the British documentary in which I took part, 
     everyone began to discuss it. Most Tibetans thought I was 
     quite brave, but some collaborators insulted me. It soon 
     seemed as if arrest was imminent. I began to fear for my 
     parents' safety and so decided to flee to the only place I 
     could think of--Lhasa--to appeal again to Chupsang nunnery 
     for re-admission.
       After arriving in Lhasa, I set out for the hour's walk to 
     Chupsang. I found a Chinese police office has been set up at 
     the nunnery. I was told to register at the office and, while 
     there, was told re-admission was not possible. I realized 
     that the police officer there would arrest me if I stayed. 
     Greatly discouraged, I set out to make my way back to Lhasa.
       Just below the nunnery there is a Chinese police compound 
     the Tibetans call Sera Shol Gyakhang. As I passed, I saw 
     three Chinese soldiers on bicycles. They followed me a 
     short distance before I was stopped. One of them took off 
     his coat and shirt and then tied the shirt around my face, 
     and shoved the sleeves in my mouth to stop me from crying 
     and yelling. I was raped by the three on the outer 
     boundary of the compound. After doing that bad thing to 
     me, they just ran away.
       I remained in Lhasa for two months under the care of local 
     Tibetans. As expected, the release of the documentary caused 
     an uproar with the Chinese authorities. My sister nuns tried 
     to disguise themselves and wore their hair a little longer. I 
     had lost all hope of continuing to live in Tibet under so 
     many obstructions and restrictions and the ever present 
     possibility of re-arrest. Even if I could stay, the Chinese 
     would forbid me to study and I feared them in many other bad 
     ways. I began to think of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in 
     India. At that time, I didn't know there were so many other 
     Tibetans living there as well, but I thought if only I could 
     reach him, if I could only once see his face...''
       Another nun and I heard of some Tibetan nomads who were 
     taking medicines to the remote areas and traveling to Mount 
     Kailash in a truck. From there we joined a group of 15 
     Tibetans to travel to the Nepalese border. In December 1990, 
     I reached northern India.
       When I first met His Holiness, I could not stop crying. He 
     asked, ``Where do you want to go? Do you want to go to 
     school?'' He patted my face gently. I could not say anything. 
     I could only cry as I felt the reality of his presence. It 
     was not a dream. In Tibet so many long to see him. At the 
     same time, I felt an overwhelming sadness. Because I was 
     raped, I felt I could no longer be a nun. I had been spoiled. 
     The trunk of our religious vows is to have a pure life. When 
     that was destroyed, I felt guilty to be in a nunnery with 
     other nuns who were really very pure. If I stayed in the 
     nunnery, it would be as if a drop of blood had been 
     introduced into the ocean of milk.
       I have been asked by esteemed persons such as yourselves 
     what makes Tibetan nuns, many very young, so brave in their 
     support of the Tibetan cause. I say that it is from seeing 
     the suffering of our people. What I did was just a small 
     thing. As a nun, I sacrificed my family and the worldly life, 
     so for a real practitioner it doesn't matter if you die for 
     the cause of truth. His Holiness the Dalai Lama teaches us to 
     be patient, tolerant and compassionate. Tibetans believe in 
     the law of Karma, cause and effect. In order to do something 
     to try to stop the cycle of bad effect, we try to raise our 
     voices on behalf of the just cause of Tibet. Thank you.


                               Evangelicals for Social Action,

                                   Wynnewood, PA, October 21,1997.
     Congressman Ben Gilman,
     Chairman, House International Relations Committee, Rayburn 
         House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Gilman:, We write to convey our strong 
     support for the Wolf-Specter bill on religious persecution 
     which is before your committee.
       We write as progressive Christians long identified with 
     struggles for economic and racial justice. As people who 
     supported U.S. sanctions against South Africa because of 
     apartheid, we endorse the application of almost identical 
     measures against Sudan.
       We find it both false and highly offensive that some are 
     seeking to portray the Wolf-Specter bill as a ``Religious 
     Right'' agenda. Our support for and belief that the Wolf-
     Specter bill is urgently needed gives the lie to such 
     nonsense.
       Aware that this bill was drafted to be moderate in its 
     reach, scope and process we urge you to pass it without 
     further compromise.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Ronald J. Sider,
                                                        President.
       Other Signers: Richard Mouw, President, Fuller Theological 
     Seminary.
                                                                    ____

                                              Department of Social


                                  Development and World Peace,

                                 Washington, DC, October 22, 1997.
     Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman,
     Chairman, House International Relations Committee, Rayburn 
         House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: As director of the U.S. Catholic 
     Bishops' Office of International Justice and Peace. I write 
     to renew our support for the Freedom from Religious 
     Persecution Act of 1997 (H.R. 2431), based on changes agreed 
     to by the sponsors. We very much welcome this legislation 
     with these changes and hope it can be the basis for a focused 
     and effective U.S. policy on religious persecution.
       In testimony before the International Relations Committee 
     last month, we outlined the U.S. Bishops' teaching and action 
     on religious freedom, and offered our general support to an 
     earlier version of this bill. The bill, and the wider 
     campaign of which it is a part is a welcome effort to raise 
     the consciousness of the American public about persecution of 
     Christians and members of other religious communities in many 
     countries, and to make religious freedom a top priority of 
     the United States Government.
       The freedom from Religious Persecution Act rightly links 
     U.S. aid to a country's performance on religious liberty, a 
     linkage that the U.S. bishops have long urged for the full 
     range of fundamental human rights. The fact that it singles 
     out only egregious acts of religious persecution does not 
     create a hierarchy of human rights any more than it creates a 
     hierarchy of religious freedoms. It simply offers a practical 
     corrective to U.S. policy in one area where that is much 
     needed. While the bill focuses on religious freedom, its 
     practical benefit would be to end U.S. aid given directly to 
     governments that, in most cases, are abusing not just 
     religious rights but a whole range of basic human rights.
       The bill would also improve reporting on religious liberty 
     by the State Department and strengthened training of foreign 
     service and immigration officers, which, given our experience 
     in these areas, seem well justified. Finally, the bill would 
     restore some vital procedural safeguards for those seeking 
     asylum from persecution on account of their religion, 
     safeguards that we urge be restored for those claiming 
     persecution on the grounds of race, nationality, membership 
     in a particular social group, or political opinion.
       In our testimony we identified several areas in which the 
     bill might be improved. Since then, we understand that 
     several changes, consistent with our proposals, have been 
     made or agreed to by the sponsors.
       Two critical changes were made in the Amendment to H.R. 
     2431, as reported by the Subcommittee on International 
     Operations and Human Rights: broadened coverage to include 
     victims of persecution of all religious groups in all 
     countries; and a broadened humanitarian exemption to include 
     development and related kinds of aid.
       Our understanding, based on discussions with the sponsors, 
     is that further changes will be made to the bill, including: 
     a broadened presidential waiver that would cover situations 
     when a waiver would be necessary to meet the purposes of the 
     act; the addition of opportunities for public comment; and

[[Page H10522]]

     changes in the multilateral development aid language to 
     exempt IDA programs which directly aid the poor.
       In addition, we strongly support the continued inclusion of 
     provisions that would end military aid, financing and sales 
     to a sanctioned country.
       The changes made so far do not address our concerns over 
     the immigration provisions of the bill, which we understand 
     will be dealt with in the Judiciary Committee. As noted in 
     our testimony before your committee, we welcome the effort to 
     expand protection for refugees fleeing religious persecution, 
     but believe such protections could be further strengthened 
     and should be available to the other four categories of 
     persecuted persons. Short of including the safeguards for 
     these other categories of asylum seekers, our continued 
     support for this legislation is dependent upon retaining the 
     minimum protections contained in the Amendment to H.R. 2431, 
     as reported by the Subcommittee.
       The bill, with the changes proposed by the sponsors, 
     addresses a serious problem in a serious way. We hope it will 
     provide a framework for bi-partisan action in this Congress 
     to increase U.S. attention and action on religious liberty. 
     The bill is not, nor does it purport to be, a solution to all 
     violations of religious liberty around the world. It does, 
     however, offer an effective and reasonable tool for raising 
     the curtain on a too-often ignored problem, combating the 
     most blatant forms of religious persecution, and helping to 
     improve the situation of millions who suffer simply because 
     of their religious beliefs.
       We are committed to continue to work to see that a focused 
     and effective bill will emerge from the Congress, a bill that 
     will serve as the framework for a serious and sustained U.S. 
     policy on religious persecution. The U.S. Catholic bishops 
     have long worked to protect religious liberty not only for 
     our fellow Catholics, but for all believers. We urge the 
     International Relations Committee to adopt the bill, with the 
     changes proposed by the sponsors, as a major step forward in 
     this urgent effort.
           Sincerely yours,
                                     Rev. Drew Christiansen, S.J.,
     Director, U.S. Catholic Conference.
                                                                    ____

                                           Religious Action Center


                                            of Reform Judaism,

                                 Washington, DC, October 24, 1997.
     Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman,
     Chairman, House International Relations Committee, Rayburn 
         House Office Building, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the Union of American 
     Hebrew Congregations and the Central Conference of American 
     Rabbis, which represent 1.5 million Reform Jews and 1,800 
     Reform rabbis in North America, I write to express support 
     for the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1997 (H.R. 
     2431).
       We have been horrified by stories of religious minorities 
     suffering brutal persecution at the hands of governments and 
     local authorities. Tibetans are ruthlessly punished by the 
     Chinese for simply owning a picture of their spiritual 
     leader, the Dalai Lama; the Islamic government in Sudan 
     commits atrocities against its Christian population including 
     torture, rape and murder; and in Egypt, the Coptic Christian 
     minority has been the target of Islamic fundamentalist 
     violence. We cannot turn our back against innocent people 
     whose sole `'crime'' is the expression of their deepest 
     religious beliefs. Having so often been the victim of 
     persecution, it is our duty and obligation as part of the 
     Jewish community to not only speak out against the 
     persecution of other religious groups around the world, but 
     to take affirmative steps to prevent such persecution in the 
     future.
       As committed as we are to combating religious persecution, 
     the legislation as it was originally introduced was 
     problematic for us. We appreciate your willingness to work 
     with us in responding to our concerns regarding the 
     legislation, and we are pleased that we are now able to 
     support the bill. The current version of the bill addresses 
     our most pressing issues by: broadening the religious 
     persecution definition to include all religious groups; 
     moving the monitoring office from the White House to the 
     State Department; providing a presidential waiver for 
     sanctions when they would endanger the persecuted group; 
     exempting humanitarian and development aid; and tightening 
     the sanctions language to limit the export ban. (We 
     understand that additional changes in the refugee section may 
     be proposed, either in advance of the markup or by amendment 
     at the markup itself, and we may be supportive of those 
     provisions as well.)
       We look forward to working with you for the swift enactment 
     of this legislation
           Sincerely,
                                           Rabbi David Saperstein,
                                                         Director.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Blunt], a member of the committee.
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time 
to me. I rise in opposition to the bill, and I do that reluctantly 
because of my great respect for the chairman, but I think it would be 
wrong to pass this legislation through this House and to do it in this 
atmosphere. We need more time to look at this.
  But more importantly, I would like to refer back to my colleague from 
Virginia's [Mr. Wolf] comments. There is surely religious persecution 
in the world today. This may even be part of it. But to pass this 
legislation to single out this kind of religious persecution in the 
face of what we know is happening all over the world turns our back on 
people who are in prison tonight, turns our back on people who are in 
slave camps tonight, turns our back on people whose lives have been 
given up over the issue of taxation.
  Now it could very well be, Mr. Speaker, that we should get to 
taxation as an issue we are concerned about, but we should not address 
that first. We should not address that at the expense of these other 
issues. We need to look at persecution, we need to look at it 
realistically, we need to look at it all over the world, and we need to 
address those cases first that are worse, not those cases that are 
about whether somebody is allowed to perform in a tax-exempt atmosphere 
or not, whether somebody's movie is boycotted in another country or 
not, boycotting would seem to me to be a pretty specific freedom of 
speech right that we would defend in America, or whether or not 
somebody pays taxes as a church in another country or not before we 
deal with people whose lives are in danger all over the world, people 
in Sudan, Buddhists in Tibet, Christians in Shanghai. We need to deal 
with those issues first.
  I urge my colleagues not to vote for this resolution.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona [Mr. Salmon].
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, I really respect the folks that have gotten 
up to speak in opposition. I believe that they believe very strongly in 
their position, and we cannot criticize somebody for speaking their 
beliefs. That is what this is all about. But I am flabbergasted at 
those who might suggest that since there is other persecution, 
religious persecution, going on in the world that we should not start 
with this.
  Mr. Speaker, frankly I am pretty appalled to hear that kind of 
language because there is religious persecution going on in the world, 
and we have to start somewhere. Here we have an opportunity to stand up 
and reaffirm what this country is all about, and I am very, very 
dismayed that some have picked up on this taxation comment. This is 
simply a sense of Congress. It was one of the examples used of many.
  We are not asking Germany to change their taxation policies. We would 
be as offended if they did that to us. We are simply using many, many 
examples whereby minority religions, again this is much broader than 
Scientology, are persecuted in Germany. We are asking for them to 
reaffirm a position, simply to reaffirm their position which their 
Constitution states, and that is that they endorse religious tolerance 
in the country of Germany.
  Yes, they are an ally, and yes we treasure that relationship, but we 
ought to be able to go to them and tell them the things which trouble 
us.
  I was talking with the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney], and he pointed 
out in the paper this morning that there was a German citizen who was 
just granted asylum in this country because of religious persecution in 
Germany. Yes, that is right, granted asylum in this country because of 
religious persecution in Germany. We have got to do all that we can to 
stop that.
  And again, I want to reaffirm it is much more than taxation. That was 
simply one of the ideas that we enumerated in the many ideas or the 
many examples of religious intolerance in Germany. Let us get beyond 
that. Let us read the bill, because it is much broader than that, and 
let us practice what we preach and stand for religious tolerance across 
the globe.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Frank].
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this 
resolution, and I think that I am as sensitive to the issue of 
persecution as anyone. I believe I am the leader in minority group 
membership in the House, claiming two myself, and I am going to vote 
against this resolution.
  I would not vote for a resolution that approved of the way Germany is 
dealing with the Scientologists and others, but I do not believe a case 
has been

[[Page H10523]]

made to do the very, very solemn act of having this House of 
Representatives single them out for condemnation. There are a lot of 
things in this world of which we disapprove, and I think the gentleman 
from Virginia quite correctly pointed out that if we were going to make 
a list of practices worthy of condemnation in this great democratic 
institution, even those critical of Germany's treatment of 
Scientologists would put it much lower on the list than practices that 
have gone unmentioned here. So there is a disproportion.
  Secondly, and I understand from my friend from Arizona that is in the 
resolution, my colleagues cannot disclaim it, they also have in the 
resolution a specific example that people in the youth wing of two 
political parties boycotted movies. Well, I do not always like people 
who boycott movies, but are we going to have a resolution condemning 
the Baptists for condemning Disney? I mean, to intermingle genuine 
religious persecution with a decision by private individuals to boycott 
a movie is a mistake. It is also inappropriate.
  Also I do think we should practice what we preach, but I do not think 
we should preach what we do not practice. If we are going to look at 
people who are engaging in inappropriate religious persecution, I think 
the Governor of Alabama would be on my list. I think people who are 
atheists and agnostics in parts of Alabama are under assault and having 
their constitutional rights impinged by the Governor of Alabama.
  The fact is that Germany is overall a very democratic nation. It is 
not perfect. There are not a lot of perfect countries around. But to 
single out Germany this way while other countries that have far worse 
patterns of abuse are ignored, to intermingle legitimate efforts like a 
boycott by political parties with actual persecution and to ignore some 
of the problems we have ourselves is wholly inappropriate.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I do not think this resolution ought to pass.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
for his strong statement.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
McCollum].
  (Mr. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this 
time to me, and I rise today in opposition to this resolution mainly 
because I have experienced a discussion over a period of time as a 
member of the Congressional study group on Germany with German members 
of Parliament about the issue, particularly of persecution of 
Scientologists and those reports we have had.
  I recall going over there earlier this year and engaging in quite a 
lengthy discussion with several of their members over this matter, and 
I have examined the paperwork and the documents and the press accounts 
and so on, and I am not here today to be able to talk about every 
instance of allegation of somebody being persecuted with respect to a 
particular religion, but with respect to the Scientologists in 
particular I am unconvinced that the Germans are in any way persecuting 
them.
  Germany has a different kind of system for recognizing religions over 
there than we do, and I do not necessarily agree with that, but they 
have a system in which there is not tithing like we have. They collect 
the taxes from the people, the contributions, if my colleagues will, to 
the churches, and apportion them out to the various churches that are 
recognized, if my colleagues will, by the government. I do not, again 
like I say, necessarily agree with that, but the fact that they do not 
think that Scientology merits their giving them this status and the, 
quote, persecution that people perceive occurring simply because they 
are not recognized for purposes under the German Government's auspices 
to practice religion is not a reason to have this resolution out here 
today.
  The truth of the matter is that Scientologists are perceived over 
there, rightly or wrongly, and some have said that here in this 
country, I do not know if it is right or wrong, as having persecuted 
some of their own members. There are those who I have heard over the 
years allege that it is difficult to ever quit the Church of 
Scientology. There are parents that have complained their children have 
been held in against their will. There are all kinds of arguments like 
that.
  But I was hearing in Germany, again I do not know the merits of them, 
but that is what the German Government believes. It is not just an 
issue of taxation. They do not think that this group, that is the 
Scientologists, are truly deserving of their recognition. It is not a 
matter of are they Christian, are they Buddhists, are they whatever, it 
is a matter of the way they behaved in Germany and their belief that 
they are not indeed entitled to this recognition.
  So I would urge a defeat of this resolution. It is very, very 
damaging to our relationship with Germany.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for his 
strong statement.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Oxley] the chairman of the German American study group.
  (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I also rise in opposition to this, I think, 
well-intentioned effort, but what is really the purpose behind this 
resolution? Is it to embarrass the German Government? Is it to 
embarrass the German people? What will ultimately come out of passage 
of this resolution? I frankly fail to see what good it would do.
  As the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] indicated, I am the 
chairman this year of the congressional study group on Germany and have 
had numerous discussions with our colleagues from the Bundestag 
particularly and also with the German Ambassador about this very 
sensitive issue.
  I was concerned, frankly, when I looked at a copy of the letter from 
the German Ambassador to the distinguished chairman of the Committee on 
International Relations, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], in 
which he indicates that he had offered to have a discussion with those 
who would support this amendment, and as near as I can tell, and this 
was dated October 29, has had no opportunity whatsoever to tell the 
German side of the story on this matter. I find that frankly appalling 
when Germany is one of our staunchest allies and ones who have a great 
deal at stake in our success in Europe, expanding NATO, expanding trade 
relations and the like. And so instead of trying to stick a needle in 
the eye of the Germans, it seems to me we ought to be more helpful in 
trying to come to understand what these problems are.
  I find the language in this resolution quite strong, particularly 
when it talks about a German fostering an atmosphere of intolerance 
toward certain minority religious groups. Then it goes on to say the 
resolution expresses concerns that artists from the United States, 
members of minority religious groups, continue to experience German 
Government discrimination. Now, I fail to see how the German government 
is somehow behind these boycotts of certain movies. There may be 
particular political groups, but as the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Frank] said, that happens all the time over here.
  So I would say to our friends, let us defeat this resolution and look 
toward a more positive attitude as we relate to our strong allies such 
as Germany.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr, Speaker, I understand the other side has a closing statement, and 
so I will conclude the opposition to the resolution, and I do rise and 
continue my strong opposition to the resolution.
  Germany is a free country in which religious freedom is guaranteed 
under the Constitution and thus sacrosanct. The U.S. State Department 
country report on human rights clearly confirms this in its most recent 
report.
  I would add that I think we need to be reminded every time that what 
we do as a body expressing our views on foreign policy is taken very 
seriously. This resolution is not balanced. It singles out Germany for 
a variety of practices, particularly those related to Scientology where 
their position is no different than seven or eight other European 
countries and several other countries outside the European Continent.

[[Page H10524]]

                              {time}  1815

  This is a troubling situation for them. It is a matter that is 
pending currently in their tax court. But I think it is important we 
not have Tom Cruise or John Travolta setting foreign policy in this 
country, and I think that is a driving factor behind this legislation. 
It is very unfortunate. I urge my colleagues to oppose the resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney], who will give our concluding remarks.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, it is probably pretty good we are coming down 
to the closure, because now we are coming down to the ridiculous, to 
mention that Tom Cruise and John Travolta are setting foreign policy. 
John Travolta and Tom Cruise and Ann Archer and Chick Corea are 
fortunate enough to have a celebrity status that can bring attention to 
the issue of discrimination, not alleged, not taxation, but 
discrimination.
  So I am glad that their intent is not to set foreign policy, but they 
have given of their time to set forth a cause that is very, very 
important to those who cannot be on this floor to speak or, to those 
who do not have celebrity status, to be able to be heard, not only 
here, but in Germany.
  This is not about taxation. Let me tell you about support, as far as 
people saying this does not have support. Things do not get lightly 
here to the floor. This was not introduced yesterday. This has been 
around. It has support, because Democrats and Republicans have voiced 
that they want this on the floor tonight, Mr. Speaker. They want the 
people of this country and the people around the world to understand 
this issue, Mr. Speaker.
  And the fact that now our Government has gone a step further and has 
officially granted asylum, do you know how hard it is to get asylum? 
Our Government stated yesterday, it was in the Washington Post today, 
that asylum has been granted to a German citizen because they dared to 
be something different, of a different religion, than us. That is how 
far this has gone.
  Painful words, someone said. It is a shame we are to the point of 
what someone may consider painful words. The reason we have painful 
words is because there have been painful deeds, not something someone 
has made up, but posters that say ``no thank you'' to a play on the 
word of ``sect,'' of minority religions.
  It goes a little beyond that. Those official sanction posters that 
have a fly swatter to swat at those pesky little minority members of a 
religion. It has gone to the point of not someone saying, let's not 
watch a movie, but of a government that has told citizens of the United 
States that you in fact shall not perform in the country of Germany 
because you are a different religion that we just simply do not like 
that is the type of thing that has occurred.
  I went to Germany. We tried to talk about this and got the fist 
pounding that, we will not talk about it. As far as primary sponsors, I 
would ask any of my colleagues if either side of the aisle sitting on 
the floor of this House tonight, Mr. Speaker, if anybody from the 
German Embassy called them, because I have been out front on this issue 
for religious freedom for minorities, and we haven't had any calls, and 
I did a quick check, and nobody I know of supporting this has had any 
type of call in fact.
  All we know is in the press. Today in Germany, they just said, as a 
matter of fact, an official of the German Government simply said this 
will not be brought up by the U.S. Congress until after January maybe 
to be discussed, because I guess they set our foreign policy now.
  So no matter how good an ally, the real shame tonight is the fact 
that they have not wanted to communicate on this issue. The fact is, 
they continue to want to choose who in fact from this country can go to 
their country, who in fact they will put under surveillance because 
they simply do not like the type of religion they are.
  These are Americans we are talking about. We are not out to destroy 
the relationship of our country, but we are talking about standing up 
for the rights of our own American citizens. That is what this is about 
tonight.
  We cannot turn our back any longer on this issue. It has been 
mentioned about the other religions, about the Baha'is. It has been 
mentioned about persecution of people around the world. I am sorry 
other things have not hit the floor. I am not saying they are not 
important. I believe that we should stand up for persecution around the 
world. We have done it in some votes, obviously, with Chinese 
resolutions.
  But just because those resolutions didn't hit the floor of this House 
tonight does not mean this is not any more important.
  So this is not something fabricated, this is not something we are 
anti-German and we just wanted to bring this up tonight because we 
didn't have anything to do. These are serious true incidents that have 
happened over and over and over. Members of Congress have stated their 
feelings about this and tried the diplomatic route over and over and 
over. And, yes, this does have support, and that is how this did end up 
on the floor of this House tonight.
  This is about standing up, no matter what you think of another 
religion, for American citizens' rights, and if the Democrat or the 
Republican Party dared, dared, on the registration forms in the United 
States to say, ``Are you a Catholic or not?'' or, ``Are you a 
Protestant, or are you a Muslim, or are you a Jew?'' if that dared to 
happen in this country, do you know what type of outcry there would be? 
On the forms, it happens over there about certain religions only: Are 
you a member or not?
  It does exist; it is real; we need to stand up.
  In closing, I am a Roman Catholic of German background tonight that 
stands on the floor simply saying, in fact, we have to stand up for 
religious freedom tonight. Our country was found that way. They didn't 
say bring in your tired, your poor, and the religion that we choose 
that can come here. This is so basic to American principles that 
everybody should voice their support of this.
  I urge the bipartisan support of standing up tonight, not to slap at 
another country, but to stand up tonight for religious freedom.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time has expired. The question is on the 
motion offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] that the 
House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, House 
Concurrent Resolution 22, as amended.
  The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. Bereuter) 
there were--ayes 3, noes 12.
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________