[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 61 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H2200-H2202]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OUR FRIEND IN THE MIDDLE EAST
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Gohmert) for 30 minutes.
Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, there's a lot going on in the world these
days. I had an interesting trip to Afghanistan this weekend, a country
into which we are pouring billions and billions of dollars and have
military there that is keeping President Karzai in office.
And he's a very grateful man. That was demonstrated when he told our
government, this Obama administration, that Dana Rohrabacher, my very
dear friend, one of the greatest patriots I know, would not be allowed
into Afghanistan, as if he had that power, because he had been very
critical of President Karzai.
So we're spending billions and billions of dollars so that a
cantankerous President of Afghanistan, who is only there because of the
lives and treasure that Americans have sacrificed, can turn around and
tell Americans, we don't want Members of Congress that actually control
the purse strings to money flowing into this country, we don't want
them here. It was rather interesting.
And as might be expected, President Karzai had his facts entirely
wrong. He was representing that Representative Rohrabacher had a bill
that was attempting to partition, divide up Afghanistan. Entirely
wrong. I knew that because I assisted with the bill and cosponsored it,
proudly, because it was a resolution that basically was encouraging
Afghanistan to allow elections of their regional governors. It
encouraged elections.
Somehow President Karzai found this very offensive, as a threat to
him. And I can see it from his standpoint. If one puts one's self in
his position, you realize, gee, I'm President Karzai. I get to appoint
every regional governor. And gee, that would be a system, like ancient
Rome, where you would be appointed to be governor, but you had to kick
back to Caesar in order to keep your seat. Interesting.
That is a plan fraught with the potential for corruption. That's one
of the reasons that Dana and I, and so many others, think it would be a
good idea, help strengthen the country, if the people in the various
regions were able to elect their governors.
President Karzai not only appoints the governors, he appoints the
mayors. They don't get to elect them. He appoints them. You want to be
a mayor of a city, you better go suck up to President Karzai because
he's going to make the appointment.
If you would like to be the chief of police, don't worry with some
local city council in Afghanistan. Don't worry with the governor.
You'll be appointed, that's right, by President Karzai.
We're told by Afghans that actually it goes so much further than
that. He even appoints many of the teachers. You want to be a teacher
at an upper level? Afghans tell me that he appoints them as well.
President Karzai gets to appoint a slate of potential legislators. He
has tremendous control of the purse strings in Afghanistan, not someone
to be countered with, you would think, unless perhaps you're from a
government that assists the government of Afghanistan in meeting its
budget needs.
{time} 2010
As I understand it, Afghanistan has a budget of $12.5 billion. As I
understand it, Afghanistan provides $1.5 billion of that $12.5 billion
budget. That's all the revenue--taxes, fees, all kinds of things.
That's the extent of their revenue.
Gee, what would happen to President Karzai if all of a sudden this
Congress did what the 1974 Democratic-controlled Congress did when,
without any regard for those who had fought with us in Vietnam and in
Southeast Asia, every penny was just completely shut off, when every
penny being spent in Vietnam back in '74 was cut off? What happened
after we left was an absolute horrible bloodbath of those who had
assisted the United States in any way.
So I don't think this Congress will be as abrupt as the Democratic
Congress was in 1974, but it certainly has the ability to do that. The
difference is, I think, there are enough people in this Congress who
realize, unless we empower those who fought the Taliban in late 2001,
after 9/11, and in early 2002 when they basically routed the Taliban
with U.S.-embedded support and air support, unless we empower those
allies by allowing them to elect their own regional governors, by
allowing them to elect their mayors, taking some of the power away from
a central administration where, regardless of whether or not reports
may or may not be accurate about corruption at the highest level, then
there is certainly corruption in Afghanistan.
It is also interesting that this administration refuses to replace
the inspector general, who is supposed to supervise and audit the money
that's going into Afghanistan. Surely, that couldn't be because it's an
election year. Surely, that couldn't be because, if we had somebody
actually monitoring where all of the billions of dollars were pouring
into Afghanistan are going, the report would indicate widespread
corruption, which would reflect poorly on this
[[Page H2201]]
administration, throwing away billions of dollars not only to the
Solyndras around the country but to corrupt administrations who are
fattening their bank accounts while Americans don't have any.
Many Americans struggle to have any money in their bank accounts, yet
we're propping up an administration over there that thinks that, on a
whim, they can say, I don't like this Congressman because he has been
critical of my administration, so we're going to keep him out.
I realize that Secretary Clinton inherited a very difficult situation
that was not of her making, but it is important in dealing with matters
of foreign policy and in dealing with matters of State that we not be
duped by people who have made careers out of duping Americans and
Russians and other nationalities.
So we have a great ally in the nation of Israel. They believe in
freedom as we do. They have a truly representative government, one in
which the Prime Minister of Israel does not forbid the elections of
other officials so that he will be the only one who has the power to
appoint. Israel allows elections, and as others have pointed out,
they're more likely more free than any of the other neighbors
immediately surrounding Israel. Even Muslims in Israel have greater
freedom to elect whomever they wish in fair and free elections. We have
an ally in Israel.
Now, I realize there are differences in views, whether the Old
Testament, the Torah, the Tanakh have valid legitimacy these days. Some
of us believe them and are proud to do so just as the Founders did.
Heck, of the 56 signers of the Declaration, over a third of them were
ordained Christian ministers who believed every word of the Old
Testament.
So I've been looking in the Old Testament for wisdom in application
to our current situation because we know, back earlier this year, The
Washington Post was told by this administration that the window during
which Israel was going to likely attack Iran was between two different
dates during a certain period. Well, that's not very helpful to an ally
when we tell the world about when an ally may choose to defend itself.
That's more a heads-up to an enemy of Israel's and the United States, a
sworn enemy of the United States, led by people who have sworn to the
destruction of the United States and Israel.
So it's a little bit confusing to see how this administration could
be going about betraying our friend Israel. It would seem, when this
administration leaked to the media that our dear friend and ally Israel
was going to utilize the relationship with Azerbaijan to attack, that
such a release was not something you would do for a friend but, rather,
a betrayal of a friend and ally.
It appears that those were efforts to keep Israel from doing what it
needed to do to defend itself when this administration is telling
Israel, Hey, just trust us. Trust us. We'll take care of your national
security, and yes, there is a window beyond which you could no longer
do any good in trying to stop the nuclear proliferation in Iran and
beyond which we in the United States could. So, if we can just force
Israel past that window, then they would have to rely completely on the
United States to do all in its power to protect Israel.
If Israel looks at what has been happening already this year with a
couple of betrayals of our friendship, that would not bode well that
the top in this administration for this country will protect Israel at
whatever cost. That has to be considered by Israel.
Then we have this report. This was dated April 19, 2012, from the
Middle East Media Research Institute. The introduction reads:
An important element in the renewal of nuclear negotiations
with Iran in the talks in Istanbul April 13 14, 2012, was an
alleged fatwa attributed to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei, according to which the production, stockpiling, and
use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the
Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons.
Indeed, U.S. leaders, among them Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and even U.S. President Barack Obama, along with
other representatives to the talks, the International Atomic
Energy Agency Board of Governors, and even highly respected
research institutes considered the fatwa as an actual fact,
and examined its significance and implications for the
nuclear negotiations with Iran that were renewed in Istanbul.
However, an investigation by the Middle East Media Research
Institute reveals that no such fatwa ever existed or was ever
published, and that media reports about it are nothing more
than a propaganda ruse on the part of the Iranian regime
apparatuses in an attempt to deceive the top U.S.
administration officials and the others mentioned above.
Iranian regime officials' presentation of facts on nuclear
weapons attributed to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei as a fatwa,
or religious edict, when no such fatwa was issued by him, is
a propaganda effort to propose to the West a religiously
valid substitute for concrete guarantees of inspectors'
access to Iran's nuclear facilities. Since the West does not
consider mere statements by Khamenei or other regime
officials to be credible, the Iranian regime has put forth a
fraudulent fatwa the West would be more inclined to trust.
{time} 2020
It goes on to talk about, and I'll just read from this:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clarified that she
had discussed the fatwa with ``experts and religious
scholars,'' and also with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan. At the NATO conference in Norfolk, Virginia, in
early April, she stated: ``The other interesting development
which you may have followed was the repetition by the supreme
leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei, that he had issued a fatwa
against nuclear weapons, against weapons of mass destruction.
Prime Minister Erdogan and I discussed this at some length,
and I've discussed with a number of experts and religious
scholars. And if it is indeed a statement of principles and
values, then it is a starting point for being
operationalized, which means that it serves as the entryway
into a negotiation as to how you demonstrate that it is
indeed a sincere, authentic statement of conviction. So we
will test that as well.''
During his visit to Tehran in late March, in an interview
with Iranian state television, Prime Minister Erdogan said,
``I have shared the Leader's [Khamenei's] statement with U.S.
President Barack Obama and told him that in face of this
assertion, I do not have a different position, and the
Iranians are using nuclear energy peacefully.''
On April 7, 2012, Kayhan International reported, citing
Press TV, that Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had
told the Turkish Kanal D TV that there is no possibility that
``Khamenei's fatwa forbidding the possession and use of
nuclear weapons might be disobeyed in Iran.''
So we can all celebrate. There's has been a fraudulent false report
of a fatwa by Khamenei. So, gosh, nobody in Iran would violate this
fatwa making it against the Islamic religion to develop nuclear
weapons. When the truth is, if Israel is not going to defend itself by
itself, as President Obama said it absolutely must on more than one
occasion, if it is going to rely on the representations of this
administration to, Trust us, we'll take care of you, we got your back,
then Israel may want to note how easy it is to deceive this
administration into believing what it wants--that Iran would not
develop nuclear weapons.
It is important to note that this administration has been praised in
messages coming from the Islamic Society of North America and other
groups actually named coconspirators in funding terrorism in the world.
They've been praised by these named coconspirators in funding terrorism
for their cleansing of training materials of our FBI, of our
intelligence, of our State Department. We have gone through and
eliminated words like ``jihad,'' words like ``Islam,'' words like
``radical,'' replacing them with things like ``violent extremism.''
When the trouble is, it is so easy to deceive national officials in any
country where they refuse to study the enemy who has sworn to destroy
them. If you will not study the enemy who is sworn to destroy you and
your country, then you will continue to be easily duped.
So we have these named coconspirators for funding terrorism out there
praising this administration and their meetings inside the hearts of
the administration at the State Department, in the White House, in the
Justice Department. They've been praised for eliminating all of these
references to such inappropriate things as ``Islam.''
Well, this weekend, despite efforts by some in this administration to
prevent it, a few of us met with our allies, members of the national
front, one of which could be elected the next President of Afghanistan.
These are people who, while we in America were burying Americans, they
were burying family members who had fought with us against the Taliban.
These are the enemy of our enemy, the Taliban. They
[[Page H2202]]
should be our friends, and they are my friends.
Therefore, when I saw my Muslim friends there at the home of my
friend Massoud, there were big hugs all around. This administration
calls them war criminals because some of them fight as viciously as the
Taliban that they fight against, but they were friends. They fought
with us. They did much of our fighting for us before we became
occupiers in Afghanistan.
Yet, when this administration throws our allies under a bus, it means
for them to stay there. Well, some of us believe that if we ever hope
to have other allies, then it is critical that we treat our allies with
respect. We don't stab them in the back. We don't throw them under the
bus. But that's a lesson hard learned.
There are international reports that say President Karzai may be
willing to resign a year early. That's been heard different places
around the world. Gee, wow, isn't that wonderful if Karzai would resign
a year early. But in meeting with my friends who have talked to some of
Karzai's circle, they point out: Do you in America not understand that
when this President Karzai says he's looking at retiring a year early,
it's not because he is some big-hearted, wonderful, democracy-loving
person? If he loved democracy, he'd let us elect our governors. He'd
let us elect our mayors. But he wants to appoint them, and he's not
ready to give up power. But the Afghan constitution apparently says
that if you've served two terms, you cannot run for a third term.
So, this President Karzai is looking at a way, when perhaps if he
resigned a year early, then he could argue, I didn't serve two terms. I
served 1 year short of two terms, therefore I can run for a third term.
{time} 2030
Being as how the President of Afghanistan appoints the governors, the
mayors, the chiefs of police, so many of the positions of power in
Afghanistan, it's quite conceivable that he could ensure that he got
elected again next time if he ran a third time. And if he were to be
allowed to run a third time and get elected, that puts him beyond 2014,
which means the United States will not be around to enforce the
promises that President Karzai made.
Oh, it's a hope and prayer that this administration will quit living
on the false promises of people who say they're going to help us, but
are sworn publicly and privately to destroy our way of life. And there
are those we continue to hear say, Look, Israel is just occupiers.
They're occupiers in this land. The Palestinians have more claim. But
as Newt Gingrich pointed out, the term ``Palestinian'' is a very recent
word that found usage. If you go back, as one reporter did, who ended
up being let go, she marveled that these people ought to go back to
Poland or wherever they came from, when actually if you look at where
they came from 1,600, 1,700 years before Mohammed existed in the city
of Hebron, a King named David ruled for 7 years. He then moved the
capital up to Jerusalem, and a beautiful capital it was.
Some have said, ``Well, where is the evidence of the Israelis being
in Jerusalem?'' Well, we know that Mohammed never went to Jerusalem. He
had a dream, as I understand it at one point, that he had gone there;
but he never physically went. That's for sure. But here is the current
city of Jerusalem. This is the city of David here, south of the Temple
Mount, Mount Moriah, where Abraham went. It's interesting, because
people have said, gee, where is the archeological evidence? And we see
people around the country in Hebron where Jesse was buried, where his
tomb is, in what I call Shiloh and they were calling Sheloh. The Ark of
the Covenant, they've found the location, it certainly appears, where
it was kept for over 300 years, long before there was a Mohammed.
People have said, well, where is the evidence? It is beginning to
show up in droves. Quite interesting, as the archeologists have begun
to look, they've realized, you know what, the city of David may have
been south down the hill from where the current Temple Mount is. They
began excavating, and they found all kinds of dramatic evidence of
Israel's existence. It's dramatic. There is no question from the things
that are being found and the way they're being dated and the dates that
are coming to light that Israel existed in the land where it has its
country now. Not just in part, but throughout the West Bank. That was
Israeli territory many, many centuries before a man named Mohammed
lived.
I'm not attempting to push my religious beliefs on anybody else.
These are simply the facts of history that we have to look at and
understand. Until we have an administration that stops blinding those
who are supposed to protect us, we're in big trouble. So it is
important that we pay tribute to our dear friend Israel, stop the
betrayals, and say thank God for the nation of Israel and the dear
friend that they are to the United States.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________