[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 30, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H3358-H3362]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMERICA'S CREDIBILITY AROUND THE WORLD
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Daines). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot going on in the world right
now, and America seems to continue to lose credibility around the world
when we travel abroad, and we have leaders from other countries,
especially moderate Muslim allies and friends, who wonder why we are
not helping in the war against terrorism, the war against radical
Islam.
{time} 1930
Moderate Muslims realize what it is. It is radical Islam. It is
exactly what the wonderful people of Egypt rose up and rebelled against
by the millions. In fact, there were more millions of Egyptians that
signed a petition in support of removing Morsi than even he ever
claimed voted for him.
The Muslim Brotherhood responded, and they have burned churches, and
they have persecuted Christians and Jews. The Coptic Christian Pope has
told us of his concern about his support for radical Islam because the
United States and even a couple of Republican Senators down the hall
had supported, seemed to support, went over and said: let's release
Morsi. They seemed to want Muslim Brotherhood back in charge.
So it was shocking for this administration to say we are not going to
supply the military equipment to those who are against radical Islam
that we had agreed to provide to those who represent radical Islam--the
Muslim Brotherhood.
Yes, their party--their political party in Egypt is called the
Freedom and Justice Party because, under their definition, freedom
means the freedom to worship only Allah and justice means only justice
that comes from shari'a law, so they have a little different definition
of freedom and justice.
In their less than 100-year history as an entity, the Muslim
Brotherhood has killed so many innocent children, women, and men who
had no grievance or gripe with Islam, but it should also be noted that
one of the reasons that moderate Muslims are so supportive of our
effort to stop radical Islam is because, whenever a moderate Muslim
stands up to radical Islam, they immediately go to the front of the
line to be killed or persecuted by radical Islamists, so we share that.
That is why the enemy of our enemy can be somebody with whom we just
may be able to cooperate.
That is what happened in Afghanistan, when President Bush committed
to go after the Taliban in October, November, December of 2001. We put
in less than 500 Americans--special operations, Special Forces,
intelligence--we gave them air support, we gave them some weapons, and
we had to negotiate.
The Bush administration did a phenomenal job of negotiating with
Northern Alliance tribal leaders because they knew, to be successful
about the Taliban, they were going to have to work together, so we were
able to pull that off. There may have been some cash that actually was
utilized to grease the skids to make it work, and it worked.
Within 4 months or so, the Taliban was defeated. The legendary
General Dostum that this administration wants to classify as a war
criminal defeated the Taliban for us as the leader of the Northern
Alliance tribes.
In a meeting with him, along with Dana Rohrabacher, Steve King, and a
few others were meeting with some of the Northern Alliance leaders,
since we knew about that last final battle where the Northern Alliance
went after the last stronghold of the Taliban elevated high up a hill
or mountain, General Dostum, through an interpreter, explained he knew
that, if they sent people on foot, they would never get there.
There would be too many bullets and rocket-propelled grenades. They
would
[[Page H3359]]
never make it to the Taliban stronghold. They knew, if they could get
there and rout them there, that that would be the end of the organized
Taliban, at least for quite some time.
So General Dostum realized the only way to really have a shot at
getting there was for around 1,000 horsemen to go charging up that
hill, up toward the stronghold with bullets, rocket-propelled grenades,
all kinds of things coming at him, but he knew that if they would move
quickly enough, they might get past those and be able to destroy the
last stronghold of the Taliban.
It worked. They did lose many of the Northern Alliance tribal
soldiers, but they made it and totally routed the Taliban. What an
incredible victory.
General Dostum offered to take me next time I came to Afghanistan. He
asked if I rode horses. I said: sure, I grew up riding horses. He said:
oh, then you need to come up with me, I will take you up that famous
ride that is so legendary all over Asia.
After that, the interpreter advised me something I wasn't aware, that
they don't have leather saddles in Afghanistan. I inquired: What kind
of saddles do you have? And he said: they are made of wood.
That changed greatly my desire to go riding uphill on a wooden
saddle, but it still is amazing what they did. They did it with our
encouragement, our support, our logistical support, our aerial support.
There are other occasions when, with someone embedded with the
Northern Alliance, the Northern Alliance leaders could say: Do you see
over there on that ridge that little hump? That is a bunker that
contains many, many Taliban.
They get the coordinates, call it in, the bomb would be released. It
would go to the target and take it out, and then the Northern Alliance
soldiers would finish off those who made it through the bombing.
Some in this administration think that means they are war criminals;
whereas the fact is they fought the Taliban in their own country the
way they have always fought and the way the Taliban fights, and they
defeated them.
Then we did an unfortunate thing. We helped them with a constitution
that centralized the government. In a very regional federalist area,
tribal area, we should have helped them have a more federalist country
where the states, the regions, have the power.
But apparently, our leaders at that time thought it would be easier
to deal with one centralized government than potentially many
hardheaded leaders of small countries or small states.
But we should have let them have their small states and their tribal
areas because as some of the northern leaders very intelligently had
pointed out: if you would help us get an amendment to the constitution
that you helped push on us, that allowed us to elect our own governors,
our mayors, pick our own police chiefs, then we could control
Afghanistan better and then the Taliban, when you leave, can't just
knock off our President and take over the whole country. Then it would
be harder for them to take over the whole country, they might get one
region, and then the rest of the regions could rise up and take them
out of that one. We can defeat them, but not with the structure that
you gave us.
There was no reason for us to lose the hundreds and hundreds and
hundreds of American military members under the command of Commander
Barack Obama, but he had said it was the important war. The war was won
by early 2002, and then we became occupiers. That was unnecessary.
Let them run their own country. They defeated the Taliban with less
than 500 Americans, and now, we have lost a number of times that
original number that went in and were embedded.
That has helped create an image of the United States around the
world, as this administration has continued to allow the slaughter of
American soldiers in Afghanistan, for what point, we don't know. At the
same time, we were allowing our soldiers to be handcuffed with rules of
engagement that restricted them or threatened them with court-martial
if they were to defend themselves and it turned out somebody got hurt
who is not a soldier.
So the world saw the United States beg the Taliban to sit down and
negotiate with us. This administration was sending out word: look, you
don't even have to agree to anything. If you will just agree to sit
down with us, heck, we will buy you a luxurious office complex in
Qatar. We may even release some of your murdering thugs that we have
confined. Heck, we will release some of them anyway, just to show our
good faith. Heck, we will do whatever, if you will just sit down and
talk with us.
There is no radical Islamist in the world that respects that kind of
talk from an American leader, from any leader. Oh, please, we beg you,
please sit down and talk with us. They don't respect that. That
projects weakness to them.
There is one thing they respect, and that is power, when used
appropriately. They may hate it, they may despise the way it is used,
but they respect power when it is used effectively. This administration
has not done that at all.
Go back to Iraq. The Bush administration basically had set up a
status of forces agreement by the end of 2008. Most of the terms were
agreed to. The Bush administration, many of us believe, could have gone
ahead and finished, had that signed before President Obama took office.
But as I understand it, it was considered a generous outreach by
George W. Bush and his administration to the incoming President. Why?
Because not only is he not stupid and he is not crazy and he is witty,
but he is a gracious man.
That is why he had Ted Kennedy to the White House so many times, even
though Kennedy would go out and bash him almost every time he had been
over. He is a gracious man, and he thought it would be a gracious act,
from what I understand, to allow the Obama administration to get the
credit from finalizing the status of forces agreement with Iraq.
But then the brazen attitude by the new administration not only
didn't sign the status of forces agreement that the Bush administration
had teed up, they didn't get any status of forces agreement.
Mitt Romney was not very eloquent in the way he pointed it out, not
very effective in the way he pointed it out, but he did bring it up in
one of the debates--he couldn't even get a status of forces agreement
done with Iraq.
It is something that this administration should have been embarrassed
about. After all, we had done for Iraq under this President, this
administration, we just crept out of Iraq with nothing even in the way
of a thank you agreement, a thank you note--in fact, rather left hard
feelings when we left.
After we left them the ability to elect their own leaders, their own
government, this administration bungled the status of forces agreement
to the point there was none. We lost further respect there. We have
lost respect around Afghanistan.
When talking with General Dostum and some of the Northern Alliance
leaders, they talked about how the United States had lost respect
around radical Islam. These are moderate Muslim friends of mine--and,
yeah, they do fight ruthlessly, but that is their area--they talked
about how the United States had lost respect among radical Islamists
among the world.
{time} 1945
They see us as a toothless tiger, a paper tiger, someone to be
laughed at, not to be concerned about or respected and certainly not
feared.
I have met with Baloch people from Pakistan, who are constantly
terrorized by the Pakistani Army and by other military--brutalized,
terrorized, kept in fear for their lives so many times. They happen to
be in the area where Pakistan's best minerals are located. You would
think that the Pakistani leaders would treat them better since they
have such a big area of the country and they comprise such a big
component of the country that has some of the most valuable land
because of the minerals in the whole area. It is the same in Iran.
There are Baloch people who are indigenous to south and southeast Iran,
and they are mistreated terribly by the Iranians.
But a thought came to mind. In having met with Baloch people
previously, in knowing the geography of the area and in having heard
American commanders and Northern Alliance individuals as well, all have
indicated most
[[Page H3360]]
of the supplying of the Taliban in Afghanistan is coming through the
Baloch area of Pakistan--not because of the Baloch. They don't want the
Taliban helped. They certainly don't appreciate radical Islam.
So I asked our Northern Alliance leader friends--former allies before
this administration--what if we started suggesting, because of the
mistreatment of the Baloch in Pakistan, that it is time to give the
Baloch their own independent country?
Let them be independent--to have their own area to which they are
indigenous--because, if we did that, the Baloch in charge of southern
Pakistan would, indeed, stop any supplying to the Taliban coming from
Pakistan or anyone else who went through the Baloch area through which
so much of the supplying of the Taliban has been going. Who would
benefit? The world would benefit. Our American soldiers would have
benefited. We could have done that years ago.
Instead, the last time I looked, there were about twice as many
people--American military individuals--who had died in Afghanistan
compared to the number who died when Bush went to war in Afghanistan.
So, under Bush, he was about 7 years in Afghanistan compared to the
years of President Obama's. President Obama has had fewer years, yet
more Americans have been killed.
Why?
Because, under this Commander in Chief, the rules of engagement have
handicapped our own military. Many of them have been killed by the very
people they were supposed to train and because there was just simply
not enough respect for the United States under this administration--
because we saw what this administration would do. If radical Islamists
reared up and killed Americans, we saw what this administration did.
They apologized that Korans were burned.
Now, how does apologizing to radical Islamists for burning Korans
that their own people had desecrated and passed messages through--
prisoners who had been provided these free Korans had sent messages,
had used them, and so they had to be destroyed. When they were found
burning, the radical Islamists used the occasion to kill innocent
Americans, and this administration apologized to the country
responsible for the killings.
In civilized countries like the United States has been--and still is
in most places--the law has been and continues to be, unless they are
under shari'a law, that provoking words are never a defense to a
physical assault or a murder. No matter what anyone says to you, does
to you--no matter what it is, no matter how vile--it does not justify a
physical response no matter what is said. Under shari'a, it is
different, but our Constitution is supposed to be the law of the land
in this country, not shari'a law.
Our fellow Texan, Mohamed Elibiary, is a man who was given FBI's high
civilian award, a man who is described by the Muslim periodical in
Egypt as being one of the six top Muslim Brotherhood leaders in this
administration, a man who spoke as a featured speaker at the huge
tribute to the Ayatollah Khomeini, Man of Vision, a man who is given a
secret security clearance without proper vetting, without proper
investigation by Janet Napolitano, as the Secretary of Homeland
Security.
Even after he was found and known to have downloaded inappropriate
material and tried to shop them, Homeland Security said: Oh, well. We
never found any evidence that he tried to shop the documents from the
classified sources he downloaded. They didn't even bother to talk to
the reporter who stated in print that he talked to a well-known
national publication to which Mr. Elibiary had shopped the documents.
They didn't investigate that. Janet Napolitano lied about that. It was
not properly investigated or they would have checked to try to find out
with whom he was supposed to have shopped these documents. They didn't
even check.
But he sure has kept his secret security clearance. He is still proud
of that FBI award. He still has a foundation called the Freedom and
Justice Foundation, which is just like the Muslim Brotherhood, which is
the same name as the Muslim Brotherhood political party. Yet this
administration continues to count on him as one of their top advisers.
That is why Muslim leaders around the world, especially in the Middle
East, have told some of us--and I talked to some other Congressmen who
had been on a trip recently to the Middle East, and they encountered
the same thing--why are you guys helping radical Islam now instead of
helping us fight it? We are wondering which one of your allies you are
going to throw away next.
It is not hard to understand why world leaders who have been our
allies would wonder such a thing when you see it with our best ally in
the Middle East--the one that respects the rights of women, that
doesn't kill homosexual, gay, individuals in their country, the one
that allows Muslims to vote, to work and to provide them protection--
the one country that allows all of those things. That is our ally
Israel. Yet we have the Secretary of State out there, previously some
months back, talking about: Gee, it may look like they want a new
intifada--another murdering spree--accusing Israel of wanting more
murdering when they have done everything they can to try to protect
themselves.
Nobody in the media--not in this country--talks about the rockets
that have never stopped flying into Israel from radical Islamist-
controlled areas. Instead, you have liberals in this country--friends
of this administration--who are out there, saying: Do you know what? We
need to cut off anything we do with Israel. That kind of talk is
supported by our own Secretary of State when he says: Gee, they are
risking being guilty of apartheid. He tried to walk it back, but he has
illustrated so much anti-Semitism that it is time for him to go. It is
time for this administration to take a stand even though our mainstream
media here in America doesn't like to hold him accountable.
Heaven help those at one of the mainstream media sources if they want
to get to the truth of something like Benghazi. Their jobs are going to
be gone. First, they are going to be told to back off, and then they
are probably going to lose their jobs. We can't expose the truth about
the present administration because, if they were interested in exposing
the truth, then it would be after the highest ranking Attorney General
in this country said to me: You don't want to go there, buddy. I said:
Are you talking about contempt? and he made it clear that he was.
In fact, I want to look at exactly what the highest ranking Attorney
General said to me in our hearing on April 8, 2014:
You don't want to go there, buddy. You should not--
Then I said: Are you talking about contempt?
You should not assume that this is not a big deal to me. I
think it was inappropriate--he is talking about Congress
holding him in contempt because he refused and continues to
refuse to provide documents that he has, that he should have
produced and that he continues to refuse to produce.
He said: I think it was unjust, but never think that it was
not a big deal to me. Don't ever think that.
That is our highest ranking law enforcement officer in the country
who was talking like that. So it was interesting.
This is what he said on February 13 of 2013. Amazing. ABC News will
call my office and say: What is your basis for that? Will they ever
call the Attorney General and say: How do you reconcile what you said
under penalty of perjury before Congress to what you told us in our
interview? Oh, gosh. No. ABC News could never do that because they
might hurt the guy who is in the White House, who they helped put
there.
So, in the interview with ABC News in February of 2013--it is not
hard to find. If I can find it, surely ABC News or somebody should have
been able to. He said to Gohmert to never think it wasn't a big deal to
him. Obviously, he is saying now it was a big deal.
This is what he said back over a year before:
But I have to tell you that, for me to really be affected
by what happened--he is talking about contempt of Congress--
I'd have to have respect for the people who voted in that
way, and I didn't, so it didn't have that huge an impact on
me.
That was Attorney General Eric Holder to ABC News in February 2013.
Now, I had in the back of my mind that it had not been a big deal to
him. Why didn't ABC News remember this?
[[Page H3361]]
{time} 2000
Nobody at ABC News, even the one who interviewed him would have
remembered: oh, you know, he told Gohmert, don't you ever think it
wasn't a big deal? Nobody remembered this from a year before at ABC
News.
Now, I wouldn't use this line, but what my old practice court
professor in law school used to say--Matt Dawson, a tremendously
effective trial lawyer--but he used to have a line, if you were caught
saying two different things, like our Attorney General has been--two
different things about the same topic, Matt Dawson used to say: Well,
were you lying then, or are you lying now?
Like I say, I am not saying that. I am just reflecting back on what
Matt Dawson would say if confronted with those two different quotes.
What I, as a Member of Congress say, is this is really outrageous. It
is time to have people in this administration that the world will
respect, that the country will respect, that will be fair and
evenhanded, will not come into Congress and mislead Congress, will not
hold up, stonewall, prevent the American people from knowing the facts
about how innocent people came to be killed with guns that this Justice
Department forced to be sold to people who should never have been
allowed to have them.
They are entitled and we are entitled, as a Nation, to have a
Secretary of State that is respected and does not say outrageous things
and accuse allies of outrageous offenses when those allegations are so
far from true.
Yes, I know Secretary Kerry says he wishes he hadn't chosen the word
``apartheid.'' How about intifada, about accusing fellow Vietnam
veterans of acting like Genghis Kahn? I always thought it was Genghis
Kahn until I heard young Mr. Kerry talking about Genghis Kahn.
It is time for us to regain some respect in the world, and it is time
for us to stop radical Islam before there is another holocaust.
I read a fantastic book written by Joel Rosenberg that came out this
spring, ``The Auschwitz Escape.'' I didn't even know anyone had escaped
from Auschwitz. It is a novel.
When you read about the novel, you get interested and find out there
were people that escaped from Auschwitz because they wanted to get the
news out to the world about what was happening, that this wasn't just a
prison work camp, that they were rounding up Jews by the hundreds of
thousands and bringing them in and, at Auschwitz, putting them in
showers and, instead of water coming out, poisonous gas did; and then
their bodies were taken right across and burned in a giant crematorium.
The people that were there always saw the smoke, always smelled the
vile smell of Jews' bodies burning.
Then you find out that, once people escaped, they got information
out, it still took far too long for America or the Allies to do
anything to stop it. We could have bombed the railroads that were
taking Jews into these prison camps, like Auschwitz, where they were
being killed in masses.
Even after people escaped and got word out, we didn't, the Allies
didn't, and the railroads continued running, and the cattle cars
cramped with Jews being taken. Initially, they were taken to the prison
camps, and a decision was made, as they walked up to an individual, you
go here, which means you are going to work until you can't work, and
then we will gas you, and then burn you; or you are not worth keeping,
so you are going to go get killed immediately.
In the end, the attempted genocide killed 6 million or so Jews.
Because they were war criminals? No. Because they had committed a crime
of any kind? No. Because they were Jews; that is a crime against
humanity.
The leaders of Iran have said they want to destroy the Great Satan,
which is the United States, and they want to wipe the Little Satan,
Israel, off the map. They want the Jewish vermin, as they sometimes
call them, eradicated.
There is some like the J Street Group, say: no, no, no, we can work
with these people. And I have to point out to any Jew who wants to work
with Iran and the current leadership of Iran, these people can't be
trusted.
When the history was written, it turned out there were some Jews that
helped the Nazis by pointing out where other Jews lived, where they
could be arrested, or where they were being hidden. There is a special
place for them in eternity.
People need to understand, the modern-day gas chambers are being
constructed. They are too near completion in Iran. Right now, they are
called nuclear weapons.
For a number of years now, we have been hearing projections: Iran is
this close to having nukes, this close to having nukes. Joel Rosenberg
raised a good point in one of his prior novels. He does great research.
In that novel, he had Iran constructing multiple--they waited until
they had enough fissile material so they could construct several
nuclear weapons, and I am sure that is their thought.
Just as with the 9/11 hijackers, yeah, they were crazy, but they
weren't stupid. They were very methodical as they plotted to kill what
they hoped would be tens of thousands of Americans, innocent people.
With glee, they thought about all the horror. With glee, some of
those that helped plan, but were not actually part of the 19, that were
joyful as they saw Americans deciding between being burned to death in
the World Trade Centers or jumping a 1,000 feet to their death, and
they rejoiced.
These same people in Iran who were so thrilled to see Americans
burning, being crushed in the World Trade Centers as they fell or even
jumping to their deaths before they fell, they were so ecstatic about
that, and these people are working on nuclear weapons. They cannot be
trusted.
Mr. Speaker, there is something this administration can do that will
regain America's respect around the world, that should stop Vladimir
Putin cold in his tracks, that will stop China from evermore
aggressive overtaking and reach beyond their borders, to stop thugs
around the world who seek to take over countries, something that would
stop them because they would fear and respect America, would be the
very thing that will protect America, will protect Israel, will protect
Saudi Arabia, will protect UAE, will protect Jordan, will protect
Egypt, and that is for the United States of America to have its
Commander in Chief issue the order: Take out anything that Iran has
that may be proliferating nuclear weapons. Take it out.
If they scramble to save something, then let's go back and hit them
again and again, not the people of Iran, unless these cruel leaders
have buried nuclear facilities in civilian areas. If they had done
that, then it would be the Iranian leaders that would be responsible
for criminally harming civilians and putting them as cowards, putting
them between the criminals and judgment day. We need to do that.
Israel doesn't have our F-35s. They don't have all of our stealth
yet. They don't have the capability to carry our best bunker busters
into Iran and eliminate their nuclear weapons. We do. Maybe it takes
more than one sortie, one group of planes going in. Maybe it takes more
than one, two, three.
We need to do it, take them out, whatever it takes, and that stops
Iran in their development of the modern-day gas chambers, the modern-
day holocaust that will occur in Israel and in America if we don't act.
I read about a survivor from one of the death camps when the American
soldiers arrived. They were so thrilled, they went running up, and the
Jewish inmate was then free, spit in his face and asked basically:
Where have you been?
Six million people killed for nothing more than being of a particular
race, and we could have stopped it far sooner. Who knows how many
millions we could have saved if we had acted sooner?
But now, we know. We know, without a doubt, Iran wants to develop
nuclear weapons, is trying to develop nuclear weapons, have said they
want to wipe us out, have said they want to wipe out Israel.
It is time to take them seriously; and by doing so, you gain respect
from the thug Taliban because they realize, as Qadhafi did: wow, if he
will do that to Iran, he would do it to us.
And then we wouldn't even have to because they would fear us and
respect us enough, respect our power--not us individually. They would
respect the
[[Page H3362]]
power, and the world could see more years of peace and could see an end
in sight maybe for 100 years or so of radical Islam. Moderate Muslims
could live in peace. Jews could live more in peace. Christians could
live more in peace.
There are Christians being persecuted around the world, probably in
greater numbers than ever before, not in percentages, but in numbers.
In countries like Iraq, where we gave them their freedom, they are
persecuting Christians and Jews. In Afghanistan, where we gave them
their freedom, they are persecuting Christians and Jews.
They were persecuting Christians and Jews in Egypt until the people
rose up and demonstrations--literally went arm in arm, a beautiful,
incredible scene for world peace, as Muslims, Jews, Christians,
secularists took to the streets to rebel and demand the ouster of a
radical Islamist who was seizing power, and had they waited another
year, they probably would not have been able to do it.
{time} 2015
For those who believe in the power of prayer, we need to continue to
pray for Israel and we need to continue to pray for Egypt and the
Egyptian leaders.
I applaud the Obama administration. I was thrilled and am so pleased
that this administration has announced they are going to go ahead and
furnish Apache helicopters to the new government in Egypt.
It is going to be tough for the Egyptians. They have got a tough
economy. They have too many on welfare. They have got a lot of
adjustments to make. But they want freedom. The masses of Egypt want
freedom. They don't want radical Islam. They don't want radical Islam
like that which rebelled and killed Qadhafi and took over Tunisia. They
don't want that.
We need to encourage them. We need to help them. We need to help them
eliminate all the weaponization that Morsi encouraged and allowed, it
turns out, in the Sinai, as Egypt stands up against radical Islam.
So I really want to thank the Obama administration for following
through in supplying the Apache helicopters that were supposed to be
supplied.
As General el-Sisi, who has stepped down as general of the military,
and who will likely be elected President, said previously, Do you not
understand we use the Apaches to keep the Suez Canal open? We are using
the Apaches to clear out the radical Islamists in the Sinai. Why
wouldn't you want to help us do that? Why would you rather help radical
Islam?
I know that in this body a majority would stand with our President
and we would be proud of him if he would protect us and protect Israel,
stop the nuclear proliferation in its tracks, not by promising to
release murderers, not by talking Israel into releasing more murderers,
and not giving Iran billions and billions of more money and not
eliminating any more of the sanctions against Iran, but just take out
the nuclear capability that has developed so far. Because otherwise, if
we let them get nukes, they will be glad to supply them to terrorists.
You don't have to have intercontinental ballistic missiles to get a
nuke to America. You can put them on a boat and float them right up the
Potomac, the Hudson, right up to Chicago, up to Houston, New Orleans,
and take out 70 percent of our refining capacity.
So they could put a nuclear weapon on even a sorry Scud missile that
is so inexact and launch it from a boat or a barge into the interior
airspace. It doesn't need to hit the ground, but there is a huge range
that even a Scud missile could make, and explode a nuclear weapon,
creating an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, that would fry most of the
computer chips in the country, shut down most of our electrical
capacity, shut down grocery stores, shut down stores relying on
computers, shut down cars that have reliance on computer chips.
They could do all that with one nuke and a lousy missile that is not
very exact. They could do that.
It is time we acted before they destroy America as we have known it,
as it has come to be the greatest country in the history of the world.
It has more individual freedom, but we see that waning. It has the
greatest economy in history, but we have seen that wane.
Now we are told in a very short time China will be the biggest
economy, unless something happens. How about if the United States stops
the modern-day gas chambers from being completed, stops the radical
Islamist enemies of America, Israel, and of moderate Muslims?
How about if we do moderate Islam a favor and take out the radicals
for them as well?
Let's get peace on track. And you don't do it with a Secretary of
State that condemns our closest allies and accuses our allies of being
criminals. You don't do it by releasing murderous thugs of countries
that hate us and are planning to kill us at some point whenever they
get the capability. You do it by self-preservation.
In Texas, we are pretty proud of our self-defense laws. When somebody
has told you they are going to kill you, and they are close to having
the ability to do that, it is self-defense to stop them.
It is time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________