[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 30 (Monday, February 27, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H962-H964]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 2010
FREEDOM UNDER ASSAULT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized
for 30 minutes.
Mr. GOHMERT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
These are the best of times and in some ways the worst of times. Our
freedoms are under assault, and some people in places of leadership do
not appreciate the threat to our freedoms and therefore are naively
assisting those who would take them away.
We know that in recent days in Afghanistan we had some soldiers who
were given the responsibility to burn Korans which were being used by
prisoners to write messages of an incendiary nature to other prisoners.
Well, it's my understanding of shari'a law that to write in such a
Koran could be considered a desecration; yet there's been no protest,
no outrage over prisoners using the Koran to pass inflammatory messages
to other prisoners.
We've also seen the death of Americans as a result. Two officers,
along with others, have been killed and injured. Our Commander in Chief
has seen fit to apologize to those who house the killers of our two
American officers.
When I think about the feelings of the family members of the two
American officers who were serving, to have a commander not do as
Lincoln and so many Commanders in Chief have done in the past wherein
they sent those troubling letters to grieving families to thank them
for their service and to truly grieve with the families, no, in this
case, the Commander in Chief sent messages instead to the home of the
killer.
Now, we're led to believe by some internationally that, gee, it just
overwhelmed the killer of the two officers. But then we hear that he
may have taken a silencer with him to work. Well, where I come from,
courts that I've been in to prosecute, my court as a judge, my region
as a chief justice, that would be considered evidence of premeditation,
of first degree murder; and yet we apologize to those who think like
the murderer.
I haven't heard a demand for an apology from Afghanistan and from the
leaders of Afghanistan, who would not be in office but for the lives
and sacrifice of American soldiers. They wouldn't be there but for
American soldiers, yet no apology from Afghanistan. So I think we have
to look a little deeper at what is really going on here.
[[Page H963]]
We know that in the United States it's been deemed to be just fine to
stick a cross that symbolizes the death and sacrifice of Jesus Christ
in a beaker of urine. Now, some of us believe that anybody that would
do such a thing without repenting before they leave this life will have
a special price to pay by the Judge of all judges, by that same Creator
which gave us our inalienable rights. But not only was that done; it
was funded by the United States Government NEA funds.
We've been told repeatedly that there is nothing unconstitutional
about burning an American flag, that flag for which so many millions of
Americans have given the last full measure of devotion. We're told that
it doesn't violate our Constitution to burn American Bibles, that
that's just fine under our Constitution. Yet we even have great
Americans who have risked their life for this country, who see the
death and loss of lives, say you know what, maybe we ought to have a
law that says you can't burn a Koran or you can't shoot at a Koran.
Some may recall that on May 22, 2008, there was a U.S. soldier that
shot at a Koran. That sparked unrest, and there were two civilians and
a Lithuanian that were killed as a result of that. Some people may
remember last year when a pastor in Florida burned a Koran; it sparked
rioting and 11 were killed, including seven U.N. workers.
What's really going on here? Well, I think it's important to look
back to the Organization of Islamic--what used to be Islamic
Conference--now it's been changed to Islamic Cooperation--and we can
find some things. I've got a chart here to show.
This is from the Third Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Summit.
It outlines the 10-year Program of Action to Meet the Challenges Facing
the Muslim Ummah in the 21st Century. This is the Islamic Summit
Conference results. It's important to note that the term
``Islamophobia'' was invented for just such occasions to try to
demonize Americans--or so-called ``Westerners''--who might try to say
there's such a thing as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, who
would seek to subjugate our First Amendment rights to the Islamic
Conference, their rules and shari'a law.
The plan, the 10-year plan from December 2005, the plan is, here at
number two:
Affirm the need to counter Islamophobia through the
establishment of an observatory at the OIC General
Secretariat to monitor all forms of Islamophobia, issue an
annual report thereon, and ensure cooperation with the
relevant governmental and non-governmental organizations,
NGOs, in order to counter Islamophobia.
Endeavor to have the United Nations adopt an international
resolution to counter Islamophobia, and call upon all States
to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments.
That's right. This is in compliance with the 10-year plan from 2005
to subjugate Americans' First Amendment rights under our Constitution
to shari'a law.
{time} 2020
It's not a terribly complicated effort, but it is brutal. It has cost
so many lives, all in an effort to not only show disdain for actions of
Westerners regarding the Koran, but also to push to get the U.N. and
all states such as the United States to adopt laws to punish what
shari'a would consider any inappropriate use or abuse of a Koran.
I happen to think as a Christian it's terribly inappropriate to abuse
a Koran. I would encourage people not to do so. I would likewise say
that it is a terrible thing to abuse a Bible and to abuse a flag. It
shouldn't be done. As a servicemember, prosecutor, judge, chief
justice, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the
United States, and that means all rights under our Constitution.
Just so people don't forget, I think it is appropriate to remember
what is in the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech or the press; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
government for a redress of grievances.
We're supposed to have the right to freedom of speech. The Supreme
Court has said that means you can burn a flag, you can burn a Bible,
you can burn a Koran. But there is a movement in all 57 states--that's
right, 57 states of the OIC--to get the U.N. and all countries to
subjugate their freedoms to shari'a law. Sure it's okay to burn a
Bible, burn a flag, but not a Koran. It's wrong to do so, but it's not
illegal.
We're told as of today that the Taliban says the airport blast in
Afghanistan was revenge for Koran burnings. This article today points
out that 40 people have been killed in protests and related attacks
since the incident became known this past Tuesday, including four U.S.
soldiers. NATO, France, Britain, and the U.S. have pulled their
advisers from Afghan ministries out of concern that the anti-foreigner
anger might erupt again. After all we've done, it's not over. These
people feel they still must subjugate our First Amendment rights to
shari'a law.
The First Amendment should be pretty clear. It should be noted that
until the 1950s when Lyndon Johnson basically got tired of churches
yapping at him over what they deemed as moral issues, he shut them up
by adding an additional provision added to the tax laws that basically
forbade any church or such organization from getting involved in
politics. My children were surprised, based on what they had been
taught in public school, that for most of this country's history,
churches were the bedrock, churches were involved in every great
movement that occurred, both in the Revolution, in the civil rights
movement that resulted in the abolition of slavery, in the civil rights
movement of the 1950s and '60s. Lest we forget, Martin Luther King,
Jr., was an ordained Christian minister. He knew and espoused the true
way, truth and light.
The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam was established in
1990. When we hear about the cause for human rights under shari'a law,
it is important to understand what that means. This is from the Cairo
Declaration on Human Rights in Islam from August of 1990. Article 24
says:
All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration
are subject to the Islamic shari'a.
Article 25:
Islamic shari'a is the only source of reference for the
explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this
Declaration.
That's what we're talking about. When the term ``human rights'' is
utilized, it's important for people to understand that under this
declaration of human rights that is still being forwarded today and
thrust at us, it's important to note that those are considered human
rights only under the definition of shari'a.
When we're told about the OIC believing and pushing human rights,
that means no one has the right to desecrate a Koran in any way,
although they can burn Bibles and American flags all day long. It means
no one has the freedom of speech to draw a cartoon about Mohammed
because if they do, they have the human right to be executed.
If someone is a Muslim and they pronounce that Jesus Christ has
become their Lord, then they have the human right to be executed. If
someone is a woman testifying under the laws of shari'a, she has the
right to have her testimony only count as half that of a man. Under
these terms, if a woman inherits from a male, she has the human right
to receive just one-half of the inheritance that a man would. Under
shari'a, as to those women on whose part you fear disloyalty and ill
conduct, admonish them first, next refuse to share their beds, and,
last, beat them. If a husband is displeased with his wife, the woman
has the human right to be beaten.
This goes on and on. I'm surprised that the women's rights movement
has not been more assertive in pointing out the inequalities that occur
in countries that espouse shari'a and the threat that it imposes to
women's rights all over the world and in America.
Under shari'a, to bring a claim of rape, a Muslim woman must present
four male Muslim witnesses in good standing. Islam places the burden of
avoiding illicit sexual encounters entirely on the woman. In fact,
under shari'a, women who bring a claim of rape without being able to
produce four male Muslim witnesses, admitting to having had illicit
sex, if she or the man is married, this amounts to an admission of
adultery and she should be punished. Some believe she should be stoned
to death and at a minimum
[[Page H964]]
flogged if she is raped and can't produce four men of Muslim good
standing on her behalf.
{time} 2030
She has the human right to be flogged or in some eyes to be stoned to
death.
There are those who are saying we should get out of Afghanistan now.
Actually, we could have done that a long time ago if a different course
had been pursued. It is not inappropriate to note that in so many
circumstances the enemy of our enemy should be considered our friend.
Along with Dana Rohrabacher and Steve King, we met twice with
Northern Alliance leaders, and although these brave leaders and their
soldiers, their horse soldiers, did what some intelligence and special
ops individuals have indicated, performed acts of heroism and gallantry
such as they'd never seen before on their behalf and on behalf of
America.
The Taliban was initially defeated, people forget, when we had
initially less than 200, at no point more than 1,500, American special
ops and intelligence just embedded with the Northern Alliance,
assisting them as the enemy of the Taliban.
Our friends, the Northern Alliance, they're Muslim. They're our
Muslim friends. But they did not want the intolerance of the Taliban
and were willing to pay any price, just as the Founders were, to
prevent having the Taliban take them over and, as they had done before,
burn films, burn books, burn art, dictate to the women, prevent their
freedoms. The Northern Alliance helped us by basically being the people
who defeated the Taliban. We provided them the arms to do it, we
provided them the aerial support, and they did it.
We disarmed them, told them they had nothing to worry about. We added
over 100,000 troops and became occupiers. We tried to nation build. We
gave them a constitution that provides for shari'a law.
Where is the apology to Afghan Christians for us getting them a
constitution that does not permit public churches? The last Christian
church in Afghanistan has closed. At last account, I'd seen there was
one acknowledged Jewish person living in Afghanistan.
Now there's intolerance. We have a $12.5 billion government in
Afghanistan. That's their budget, and they provide about $1.5 billion
of their own. You know what happens to that government when we pull
out? That's why the Taliban is telling people, even on Afghan
television, We're going to be in charge as soon as the U.S. pulls out.
There are ways to deal with this issue. If you just look at the map,
you get a good idea what we're talking about.
During a recent trip to Afghanistan and meeting with Baluch people--
let's first look at the map itself.
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, India. Now, before 1948, this area in
here was Baluchistan. In 1948, the arbitrary lines that were drawn put
Baluchistan in with Pakistan. This used to be a Baluch area. As a
recent Pakistan Daily News editorial pointed out, most of Pakistan's
natural resources come from this area. As people have advised us in
Afghanistan when I was over there recently, the Taliban are being
supported by supplies, arms. They're getting their support from
southern Pakistan into southern Afghanistan. They're coming through the
Baluch area.
The Baluch don't want that. They're Muslim. They're our friends. They
want to be our friends. They would be wonderful friends. They have been
terrorized by the Pakistani Government for decades, and we've stood by
and didn't seem to care, the world has.
Well, perhaps it is time to recognize an independent Baluchistan,
where we'd have a friend who would not keep supplying the enemy of
America, those people that helped train and prepare for 9/11 to kill as
many thousands of Americans as they could.
We don't want to leave Afghanistan in the hands of the Taliban and
all of the American life and treasure be for nothing. But there is an
easy answer. We leave, but we empower the enemy of our enemy, the
Northern Alliance and the Baluch people. Let them take care of their
own area. Let them prevent the Taliban from taking over. Let them
prevent Pakistan from becoming such a focused enemy as they have
unabated. Let them worry.
India wants to be our friend.
If we look at the area of Pakistan, well, this shows the different
major ethnic groups. Pink here is the Baluch people; green is the
Pashtun. And, of course, only a tiny percentage of the Pashtun people
make up the Taliban, but virtually all of the Taliban is made up of
Pashtun. They do come over here into Pakistan. Then we have brown as
the Punjabi and the yellow as the Sindi.
Northern Alliance is up here. You've got a number of different groups
up there, including Uzbeks. But these are people who do not want the
Taliban to ever take over. They're the enemy of our enemy, and that's
where we can do some real good. It's time to stop the support of those
who would take away our First Amendment rights.
There's an article, this is from CNN, May 20, 2009:
Military personnel threw away, and ultimately burned,
confiscated Bibles that were printed in the two most common
Afghan languages amid concerns that they would be used to try
to convert Afghans, a Defense Department spokesman said
Tuesday.
The unsolicited Bibles sent by a church in the United
States were confiscated about a year ago at Bagram Air Base
in Afghanistan because military rules forbid troops of any
religion from proselytizing while deployed there.
Such religious outreach can endanger American troops and
civilians in the devoutly Muslim nation.
Why would it endanger civilians if they have the rights that
Americans say we're fighting for? Why? We're burning Bibles, the
American military did, back in 2009?
I was given this Bible by my aunt, told that it was provided during
World War II to my uncle, says, ``May the Lord be with you.'' It's a
New Testament, and inside the front cover it says:
As Commander in Chief, I take pleasure in commending the
reading of the Bible to all who serve in the Armed Forces of
the United States. Throughout the centuries, men of many
faiths and diverse origins have found in the sacred book
words of wisdom, counsel, and inspiration. It is a fountain
of strength, and now, as always, an aid in attaining the
highest aspirations of the human soul.
Signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
That wasn't signed by President Obama. It was signed by Franklin
Roosevelt, and it was given to our soldiers.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, let me just say, if the President takes
more action to demean the American rights and to eliminate our own
rights, then it's time for the President to apologize, not to
Afghanistan but to the American people.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________