[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 33 (Thursday, March 1, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H1123-H1127]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            THE ADMINISTRATION IS NEGOTIATING WITH MURDERERS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized 
for the remainder of the hour as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, there's so much going on in this country. 
There are so many great folks and some that are not so much. There are 
stories out indicating that this administration is considering 
releasing the Blind Sheikh. He's credited with helping mastermind the 
first attempt to bring down our World Trade Centers. He is credited as 
the Islamic fanatic who issued the fatwa that was considered by the 
radical extremist jihadists to justify killing thousands and thousands 
of Americans--what they hoped would be tens of thousands of Americans--
at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. One report indicated that 
with regard to the Pentagon, if the plane had not just brushed across a 
berm outside the parking lot before it hit, it probably would have gone 
all the way into the interior, doing a massive amount of more damage 
than it actually did. Because of the valiant work of so many first 
responders, there weren't tens of thousands killed at the World Trade 
Center. But we suffered the loss of 3,000 murdered because of some 
religious fanatics, the Blind Sheikh being one of them.
  The story is out yesterday and today that the administration is 
considering the release of the Blind Sheikh and other American 
murderers so that we can obtain the complete release from Egypt of 
people that went there to try to help the Egyptians have free and fair 
elections. And in return for going there and providing the billions of 
dollars this country gives to Egypt and continues to give, in return, 
the people in charge--that this administration welcomed in charge of 
the Egyptian Government, as they stabbed an ally name Mubarak with whom 
they had written agreements--I'm not saying he's a great man; I'm 
saying this country, this administration, had agreements with that man, 
and this administration broke those agreements and stabbed him in the 
back. As a result, now we have Americans in harm's way, some of them in 
the Embassy in Egypt.
  Now, the reports are that the administration is considering releasing 
murderers, people who planned and were complicit in murders and 
attempted murders of Americans, and this administration is considering 
releasing them and may be negotiating that.
  Now, I'm hoping that this report is what this administration has done 
many times, and that is release a trial balloon to see how people 
react. And if people react violently enough--verbally, that is--against 
it, then they will say, hey, no, we never planned to do that. And I'm 
hopeful that that will be the case here. People who have been 
responsible for murdering and attempting to murder Americans have no 
business being used as bargaining chips. If the rule of law and of 
justice is going to mean anything in this country going forward, we 
cannot be bargaining with American liberty.
  Now, some of us recall very well in 1979 when an act of war occurred 
by the people, by the Government of Iran in Tehran, against the 
American Embassy. Everyone's idea of international law indicates that 
the soil on which an Embassy exists is the soil of that country. If you 
attack the Embassy, then you have attacked that country. And it

[[Page H1124]]

was my recollection, and those of us that were stationed at Fort 
Benning at the time, we knew it meant that many of the people, many of 
us at Fort Benning, may have been sent to Iran if a war broke out. 
Everyone was watching to see if, as the term was used, the flag were to 
go up, who was going to go. Nobody was dying to go, but everyone was 
willing to go and die in defense of our country.
  The Carter administration, instead, began pleading with the Iranian 
Government to let our hostages go. It was my recollection back during 
the time as we watched from Fort Benning, I'm not sure what the fate of 
those of us at Fort Benning would be, but the spokesman for the Iranian 
Government kept saying, the students have the hostages, the students 
attacked the Embassy. And it just seemed to me, as a captain in the 
Army at the time, do you know what it sounds like? The Iranian 
Government is trying to give themselves a backdoor so that if President 
Carter stands up and finally becomes a great leader and shows great 
leadership and stands up and says:
  All right, you're saying that students have the American hostages? 
Well, then, here is the deal: An act of war has been committed, and 
either you release, you deal with those students and you get those 
American hostages released, or we're bringing the full weight of the 
American military against Tehran for the release of those people. And 
if those hostages are harmed before we get there, then we will 
overthrow your government and we'll leave. We're not going to nation-
build. You can pick whatever government you want, it's your business, 
unless you attack the United States of America. Because when you attack 
the United States of America, it is our business. We won't nation-
build, but we will take down any government of any nation anywhere that 
commits an act of war against us.
  That's what President Carter should have done. And now these rumors 
swirl around, these reports from media resources that tell us they are 
reliable, that this government now is thinking, well, maybe we'll dodge 
what the Carter administration did that got President Carter defeated 
for a second term. Maybe if we just release murderers of Americans, 
maybe if we'll just give them whatever they want, they'll release these 
people or allow them to leave the Embassy and travel back to America, 
and we'll be okay.

                              {time}  1220

  Wrong. You release people who declared war on America, who declared 
war on the World Trade Centers, on New York City, on Washington, D.C., 
you release those people, you have not made America safer. You've 
endangered far more lives than you got released.
  I like Ray LaHood. He's a good man. We haven't agreed on some things, 
but he's a good man. I know that. It broke my heart when I saw that his 
wonderful son, who believes in liberty and freedom, was being kept 
against his will from leaving Egypt. He went over there to help them 
have a free and fair election. But from what I know--having not met 
Ray's son--I don't think he would want the lives of tens of thousands 
or millions of Americans jeopardized because this administration might 
be trying to avoid losing an election as President Carter did.
  The thing to do is the thing that President Carter didn't try. He 
tried the negotiations. He offered all kinds of things. The thing to do 
is say: Egypt, we have given you American treasure. We supported your 
efforts in electing leaders. Here is the deal. We sent you people to 
have free and fair elections. If you're going to hold them hostage, 
then that is an act of war on us and we will come to Egypt.
  We're not going to go to war with the nation. The whole nation of 
Egypt is not against America. But if the regime in power is going to 
take Americans who came over there to help them, who were participating 
in helping a process so that Egypt could continue to get U.S. funds to 
stabilize their country, if they're going to declare war on those 
individuals, then we will take out that group that is presiding and 
attempting to govern. We won't nation-build, but we will allow you to 
put whatever government you want in place. If they come against 
America, we will come against that government; not against the people, 
but against the government. We will take that government out and then 
you pick some other government. We don't care who it is. We don't care 
what kind of government you have, as long as they're not at war with 
America. But if you commit these kind of criminal acts of war against 
American citizens, against America, we will take that group out that is 
governing in that manner and then you find one that won't declare war 
on America.
  That's what needs to be done, not releasing the Blind Sheikh, not 
releasing American murderers. That is not the thing to do. I hope and 
pray that tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of 
American lives will not be jeopardized by this administration just 
hoping to avoid a hostage crisis like arose in Tehran.
  That arose because of a weak administration refusing to do what it 
should have in response to an act of war. Because what we saw after 
those initial periods where they said, ``No, the students had them; 
we're trying to negotiate; we're trying to work with them,'' eventually 
they saw the Carter administration was not going to do anything, and so 
they began saying, ``We had the hostages; we had the hostages,'' and 
started making demands and threats and things like that.
  The thing to do is say, look, we want to live at peace with every 
nation in the world; but you declare war on Americans, we will take 
that government out and let the people choose whatever kind of 
government they want. We should not be nation-building. You pick what 
government you want and we will live in peace as long as they don't 
declare war on us. If they do, we're coming. We'll take them out and 
then you pick your next government. That's what should be done, not the 
release of murderers, of those complicit in American murders, such as 
the Blind Sheikh.
  I hope that enough people in America will rise up, Mr. Speaker, and 
make their voices heard. Don't be releasing people who declare war on 
America, who have American blood on their hands. We do not want to put 
the future of America in foreign hands that are covered with American 
blood. That is not the course to take.


                         Civil Rights Movement

  One other thing I wanted to mention before I get to a tribute, and 
that is with regard to the Selma march, that is with regard to the 
civil rights movement.
  There are some in America who think people like Martin Luther King, 
Jr., John Lewis, others who were such participants in the civil rights 
movement--people see that and say that was a movement by blacks or 
African Americans to try to have equal civil rights. But having read a 
great deal about Martin Luther King, Jr., it's very clear this was a 
Christian minister, an ordained Christian pastor. I haven't heard 
anybody in the wonderful tributes that have been paid here today as we 
commemorate that march in Selma, I haven't heard anybody mention this.
  As a Christian minister, Martin Luther King, Jr., and those who 
participated, did more than help African Americans move closer toward 
having full equality, toward equal rights. It did more than that. For 
those of us who were young, white Christians, for those who would come 
behind us as Euro Americans, white Americans, they did something 
wonderful for us. They created an environment in which all Christians--
whites, all Christians--would be able to treat brothers and sisters as 
being brothers and sisters. They did a great service for all Americans.
  So I will lend my voice, such as it is, in tribute for the service 
that was done for all Americans, and anxiously long for the day--we're 
getting so close--but long for the day when people are judged by the 
content of their character and not the color of their skin; where there 
are no quotas, there is no need for a Justice Department to review 
everything, because people are acting and treating each other in ways 
of equality, so that we finally achieve the dream.


                            Andrew Breitbart

  Now I want to turn to a tribute to a great man. This Nation and 
freedom has lost a great proponent and defender.
  Andrew Breitbart, who was reported to have died this early morning in 
California, was and is an American hero of

[[Page H1125]]

mine. This man, in what appeared to be the prime of his life, knew that 
the key to keeping our endowed freedoms was shining the bright rays of 
sunlight on whatever issue was stealing away our Nation's prosperity 
and liberties.
  Many came to know Andrew as the brains and the will behind the 
exposure of a cancer on our system that was exemplified by some of the 
things going on with ACORN, where they were not bothered by the thought 
of underage girls being placed in the bondage of sexual prostitution 
and they were not bothered by the idea of getting people in the country 
illegally for immoral and illegal purposes. He figured out a way to 
deal with these issues and to address what was sucking the nutrients 
and the life from this host country as, really, a cancer.

                              {time}  1230

  He figured out how to shine sunlight inside offices of what was 
happening and gave a good dose of chemotherapy to the cancer.
  He also innovated ways to expose the extreme bias within many in the 
media that were holding themselves out as being objective. We have 
freedom of speech. We have freedom of the press. But there should be 
some degree of honesty. If someone is expressing an opinion, it should 
be reflected as an opinion and not as unbiased journalism.
  Andrew had been in the process of exposing that, as well as so many 
other issues that were weakening our Nation and infringing our 
liberties, were deceiving rank-and-file Americans of the truth and our 
factual history. Andrew was serving as a clarion call to action for 
honorable Americans across the country to seek truth, justice, and the 
American way.
  In visiting numerous times with Andrew, he was so excited. He could 
see that he was literally, and profoundly, making a difference for 
truth.
  Often, when innovators or impassioned innovative visionary people 
depart this world, they have not had the benefit of seeing any of the 
fruits of their labor. God had favored Andrew with a glimpse of the 
difference that he was making.
  In this book that--and I acquired this copy from the Library of 
Congress, ``Righteous Indignation'' by Andrew Breitbart--this is a new 
conclusion to Andrew's recent books. He wrote this new conclusion 
himself.
  These are Andrew's words:

       I love my job. I love fighting for what I believe in. I 
     love having fun while doing it. I love reporting stories that 
     the complex refuses to report. I love fighting back. I love 
     finding allies and, famously, I enjoy making enemies.
       Three years ago I was mostly a behind-the-scenes guy who 
     linked to stuff on a very popular Web site. I always wondered 
     what it would be like to enter the public realm to fight for 
     what I believe in. I've lost friends, perhaps dozens, but 
     I've gained hundreds, thousands, who knows, of allies. At the 
     end of the day, I can look myself in the mirror and I sleep 
     very well at night.

  He now sleeps in the arms of God.
  Andrew was being demonized by those who were profiting from their 
deceptions of people and their cronyism with the government. He was 
rallying like-minded Americans to seek and take back the liberties with 
which they were endowed and upon which liberties vast encroachments 
have been occurring.
  I would like to speak straight from the heart, but I typed these 
lines up just moments ago because of the difficulty. It's easier to 
read. Let me finish with what I wrote moments ago.
  Andrew had two films coming out in the near future, of which he was 
so proud, as he showed me and my friend, Steve King, here the trailers 
very recently. Those films can and will be quite powerful in furthering 
the cause of sunlight on darkness, though they may now have to be 
modified because of his passing.
  But Andrew was so kind to be an encourager to my daughter in 
California, was always complimentary of her when we talked. He knew how 
to make a father proud.
  In considering Andrew's works, the life and death of John Quincy 
Adams comes to mind. Adams had been elected President in 1824, first 
son of a former President to be so elected. In 1828, he was defeated by 
Andrew Jackson.
  In 1830, John Quincy Adams did the unthinkable. He had been President 
of the United States; and yet he was driven by a God-placed feeling, a 
need to stop slavery in America. So after having been President, he 
lowered himself to run for the House of Representatives and was elected 
in 1830, sworn in in 1831, and served until 1848 just down the Hall in 
what we now call Statuary Hall. He was a driven man.
  He believed God had called him, as he did William Wilberforce, to 
bring an end to slavery--Wilberforce in the British Isles, the United 
Kingdom, and Adams in America. He was concerned, appropriately, that it 
would be difficult to expect God to keep blessing America if we were 
putting brothers and sisters in chains and bondage.
  He gave powerful speeches over and over down the Hall trying to 
convince the other Members of the House to pass bills that would end 
slavery, that would free slaves, and he never got it done. In fact, at 
one point, he had so alienated the Rules Committee, they passed a rule, 
he couldn't even bring those types of bills anymore. So then he had to 
fight the rule so he could go back to filing bills to end slavery and 
free slaves, and eventually he did. And he preached those powerful 
sermons down the Hall against slavery.
  In 1846, a young man, not particularly handsome, some at Gettysburg 
that heard him years later said he didn't have all that pleasing a 
voice to listen to, he didn't have a beard at that time, but a young, 
skinny, some-would-say homely-looking guy was on the back row, just 
down the Hall of the House of Representatives.
  Adams liked this guy. Adams was not necessarily referred to as being 
a warm and fuzzy, cozy kind of guy, easy to warm up to, a bit 
cantankerous at times; but he liked Lincoln.
  In 1848, having spent so many years devoted to many great causes, but 
particularly to the cause of trying to end slavery, sitting at his 
desk, John Quincy Adams had a massive stroke. He was moved back into 
the Speaker's suite just off the floor, died 2 days later. 1848.
  Thirteen years later, Abraham Lincoln was sworn in as President of 
the United States. It was reported that someone had asked Lincoln was 
there anything memorable that happened during your two brief years in 
the House of Representatives. He was reported to have said, in essence, 
not other than those powerful speeches of John Quincy Adams on the 
evils of slavery.
  Lincoln knew it was wrong. It tore at his soul that slavery existed 
in America. After he lost after one term, he went back, tried to make a 
little money, did, practiced law, represented the railroad some, but 
the compromise of 1850 allowed new States to come in that would have 
slavery.
  Lincoln had thought perhaps he was done with slavery, but he couldn't 
stand it. He got back involved in politics, lost, lost again, got 
elected President, and then helped bring about an end to slavery in the 
United States.
  John Quincy Adams did not bring an end to slavery as he had hoped, 
but he profoundly affected that young, skinny, less-than-handsome-
looking guy named Abraham Lincoln.

                              {time}  1240

  Andrew Breitbart is gone. That's the report. I'll be interested to 
see what the autopsy says.
  But I can't help but think his devotion to truth, to preserving 
liberty will have inspired so many who will pick up that banner and 
potentially, as was the case with John Quincy Adams and Abraham 
Lincoln, do far more than Adams himself could have done, and in this 
day, in the years to come, do more than Andrew could have done by 
himself.
  Though Andrew did great service to himself, his family, and his 
Nation, it's my prayer that his greatest contribution to this, the 
greatest Nation with the greatest freedoms in the history of the world, 
will not be those specific but amazing accomplishments he achieved, but 
that his greatest accomplishment will be the inspiration he was and is 
to so many who saw his devotion, saw his commitment, saw his goals, and 
will, just as did John Quincy Adams, accomplish more through those he 
inspired than those he could ever have accomplished individually.
  At a time like this, there is sometimes a temptation to blame God and 
ask, why did God take such an individual so soon? Our directed comments 
to our Creator should instead be,

[[Page H1126]]

Thank You, dear God, for the gift of Andrew Breitbart. We wish we could 
have kept him longer, but thank You for this marvelous gift.
  God be with his family, comfort his family. Andrew will be sorely 
missed by seekers of truth. His departure will be welcomed by those he 
was exposing, but they shouldn't be too comfortable. He was a patriot. 
He was a lover of liberty. He was a lover of family. He was a lover of 
God, a lover of this Nation. He was also a friend and encourager to me.
  With that, I would yield to my friend, Steve King, from Iowa.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas.
  Timing of circumstances, Mr. Speaker, brought me to the floor here 
simultaneous with this wonderful tribute that Mr. Gohmert has provided 
to Andrew Breitbart and the life and the things that he stood for and 
believed in. I don't know how I can add to the completeness of the 
message that Louie Gohmert has delivered here.
  I had the privilege of calling Andrew Breitbart my friend as well. I 
think of the last time Louie Gohmert, Steve King, and Andrew Breitbart 
were in the same room, and it was over in the place that I 
affectionately call The Bunker, the house a couple of blocks east of 
the Supreme Court--very fitting, by the way--just almost within gaze of 
the east portico of the Supreme Court where Moses sits there looking 
down upon all of humanity with the tablets on his knees, with the Ten 
Commandments in his arms, and saying to all the world, We're a Nation 
of laws, not a Nation of men, and that our laws come from God, and his 
profound belief in that.
  As we were there, I remember I was invited to a dinner over at 
Breitbart's. Now, some might think that a dinner with Andrew Breitbart 
could be somebody sitting at the table with cufflinks, for example. 
It's possible, but it's unlikely that there's actually going to be a 
table. It's more likely that there's a counter in the middle of the 
kitchen, and on that counter and on the counter over on the wall were 
refreshments of all kinds, teetotaling and nonteetotaling refreshments. 
On the other counter are ribs and chicken. I think the ribs were there 
for Louie Gohmert, personally. He and I are the only two Members of 
Congress.
  In that room was a constant din. Within that din, you'd always know 
what was on Andrew Breitbart's mind. Whenever he spoke, there was 
always an ear tuned to that, but he was very much a person engaged in 
the moment. He was driven to no end. I know when I walked in the room, 
he played a trumpet with his hand just to get the attention in that din 
now that I'd arrived.
  But what I remember was that it was an engaging conversation about 
liberty and freedom and freedom of the press and truth, justice, and 
the American way, as Louie has said. When it was all done, the 
refreshment bottles were empty and the ribs and chicken were bones, and 
we'd had one of the most engaging evenings you could ask to have in 
Washington, DC, and we have some here.
  That, I think, does describe Andrew Breitbart's life: engaging.
  I don't know who was more engaged than Andrew Breitbart. I look back 
at it. Just, for example, this morning I got up and I got ready to go, 
and I changed my pin over here and I put my Constitution in my pocket 
here and I put my keys in this pocket. Other than that, the only one 
other constant was I had to look around this morning and I couldn't 
find it. I went over to my backup storage, and I pulled this out and 
put it in my pocket this morning.
  Let the record show, Mr. Speaker, this is an acorn. I've carried an 
acorn around in my pocket for about 2 years. I wouldn't be doing this 
if it weren't for the influence of Andrew Breitbart. In fact, we might 
not even know about the threat to the underpinnings of our 
Constitution, the legitimate electoral process we have in this country, 
if it hadn't been for Andrew Breitbart.
  Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe came together and they went out and 
got some brilliant tape of the unconscionable activities of ACORN that 
produced over 400,000 false or fraudulent voter registrations. How many 
other false votes went up, we don't know.
  But my belief is, and I believe Andrew's belief was, that the 
Constitution is the foundation of American liberty. But underneath that 
foundation that sits on the bedrock of legitimate elections, any entity 
that threatens those legitimate elections threatens the very 
Constitution itself and American freedom.
  It was Andrew's brilliance that took those tapes of Hannah's and 
James and said, You roll these out, they will discredit you. They will 
attack you. You will be under the heat like you've never seen before in 
your life. We need to give them a little bit, and then they will attack 
you and say that's the only one. It's an anomaly.
  Really, the tapes of the unconscionable acts of ACORN would be 
discredited immediately. It was Andrew who put together the strategy.
  First, you have to know the man to have instant confidence that he 
knows, and he instantly thinks ahead. He never was, I don't think, a 
linear thinker. He always was a conceptual thinker. Some might go A, B, 
C, and maybe can get their way to Z. Andrew could go A, here's Z, and 
you know he knew every letter in between and how they were rearranged, 
and he could see the strategy in an instant and he could inspire you to 
step forward to that. That was part of the brilliance of Andrew 
Breitbart. That's one of the reasons I will carry this acorn in my 
pocket until they are gone.
  As I sat and thought about the life of Andrew, I wrote these words 
down to try to describe him, and words do not describe the man that 
Andrew was.
  I used the words ``dynamic,'' ``brilliant,'' ``fearless,'' 
``visionary,'' ``altruistic,'' ``passionate,'' ``unconventional,'' 
``trailblazer,'' ``patriot,'' ``lost friend.'' All of those things 
describe Andrew Breitbart, and many, many more.
  As Louie Gohmert has said, his influence will be cascaded across this 
civilization and this culture, I believe, in perpetuity, just like the 
influence of John Quincy Adams has had that influence.
  What I want to say also is that Andrew had a real sense of righteous 
indignation of when the ObamaCare debate was taking place here and an 
effort was staged to cast aspersions on the Tea Party as being racist. 
I remember in the middle of that press gaggle when they said, What do 
you think? Somebody was hollering the ``N'' word out at the 
Congressional Black Caucus as they walked across the grounds.
  I said, Who has reported that? They named that. Who actually heard 
it?
  They couldn't name me who heard it.
  Andrew Breitbart understood that it was a manufactured story created 
to discredit the Tea Party and put $100,000 on the table for anybody 
that could produce an audio or a video that would confirm the false 
allegations of racial epithets being thrown by the Tea Party at 
anybody. He shot that story down, and he has provided us a tremendous 
amount of credibility for the Tea Party in the process.
  Pigford Farms, another story. The list goes on.
  Andrew Breitbart understood the science behind the communications in 
the world. He understood the Internet before many even knew the 
Internet existed. He understood its potential. He had opened that up 
with big everything, with big ideas and global ideas and had them 
grounded in the full spectrum constitutional conservatism with an 
effort to provide protection for the rights of everybody, as God gives 
us those rights.

                              {time}  1250

  I am also tremendously saddened by the loss of our good friend. It's 
a big Breitbart family that grieves today and prays that he will be 
nestled in the hands of God and that his close family will be well 
taken care of and energized and nurtured by the profound belief that 
they've had the wonderful privilege to have Andrew Breitbart as their 
father, husband, friend, and that his influence moves on. We dedicate 
ourselves to the renewed effort to follow through on those efforts, and 
we will seek to do what we can to match and emulate the brilliance of 
Andrew Breitbart.
  I appreciate my friend Louie Gohmert for coming to the floor and 
starting the beginning of a national conversation about the long reach 
of Andrew Breitbart, and it reaches into the future. I thank Andrew for 
his life. I thank God for Andrew's life.

[[Page H1127]]

  Mr. GOHMERT. In conclusion, we pay tribute to a big man, as Jesus 
said to the poor man of Nazareth, who has now been carried to the bosom 
of Abraham by the angels.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________