[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 28, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H655-H659]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COMBATING TERRORISM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Clawson).
No Nuclear Iran
Mr. CLAWSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Gohmert for yielding to me.
Already a grave and growing existential threat to Israel, a nuclear
armed Iran would be a colossal, horrific game changer. It would launch
a nuclear arms race in what is already the world's most dangerous
neighborhood. We all know that this must not be allowed to happen.
The Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear ambitions are made more dire
when considering that they are the world's most dangerous state
supporter of Islamic extremist terrorism, with a destabilizing presence
in Lebanon, in Syria, and in Iraq. And Iran's financial and military
support for the Houthi rebels in Yemen has led to the collapse of the
Hadi government.
Thus, Iran today exerts major influence, not just in rebel
territories, but in four Middle East capitals--Beirut, Baghdad,
Damascus and Sana'a.
The crisis in Yemen threatens to launch yet another civil war in the
region, and this severely handcuffs U.S. counterterrorism operations
against AQAP. Islamists in Iran and elsewhere repeatedly threaten to
slaughter all standing in their way--with their ultimate targets being
Israel and the United States--us, their great Satan. They must never be
allowed nuclear weapons capabilities. Does anyone really doubt whether
they would use these capabilities someday? Well, there must be some
reason why Iran is developing ICBMs.
Last week, Iran's Channel 2 broadcast satellite imagery showing
recently constructed missile-related sites. Those sites included a
launch pad capable of firing an ICBM, and on that launch pad was a
never-seen-before missile measuring 27 meters in length. While we
negotiate, the Iran story gets worse.
We have been extending deadlines and softening sanctions on Iran,
while they fail to meet their end of the bargain.
{time} 1115
It is bizarre to me that we are debating with the Iranians the
numbers of their centrifuges but leaving off the table their support
for terrorism, their ICBMs, and their continued human rights
violations.
Is it the right thing to do to sit across the table, remain silent
about the costs we and our allies have paid and are paying because of
their financial and military support of our enemies? Does this make
sense? Shouldn't we insist on adding to the agenda Iran's destabilizing
actions in the region and also their ICBM program that puts us all at
risk?
Merely delaying some of the potential horror for a decade or so is
not a good option in my view. A bad deal where we declare victory by
kicking this can down the road is far worse than no deal at all.
Iran now threatens to end nuclear talks if Congress increases
sanctions against their regime. I say we must never yield to threats
from Iran or any other nation.
We must stand strong, continue sanctions, and even strengthen them
until Iran gets the message. I believe that strengthening sanctions
will get us a better deal. Leverage produces a better deal.
We must remain unwavering in our support for Israel. We must listen
carefully to the concerns of Prime Minister Netanyahu on this subject.
I hope we unite with our Arab partners and do all that is possible to
prevent Iran from going nuclear.
We must lead the civilized world in this crucial mission. I think
this is our destiny.
We urge President Obama to join with Congress in this resolve.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, there is a great deal going on, and I think
the first thing that needs to be addressed is the 70th anniversary of
something that should never have happened in civilized society. This is
the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz death camp.
As a schoolboy growing up in east Texas, later attending Texas A&M,
and especially in my time, my 4 years in the United States Army, as we
discussed and looked at World War II, things that had occurred then--I
was a history major and was with the Army for 4 years and majored in
history.
It was just always amazing. How could people who said they were
civilized kill 6 million of any race, gender, national origin? How
could that happen?
But it did happen. On learning that Eisenhower required people from
the surrounding villages to be brought in to help clean up
concentration camps, death camps--as I understood the reason--was so no
one could ever deny that the death camps occurred.
I thought that seemed ridiculous. How could anybody deny the
Holocaust? There aren't all that many survivors, but there are enough,
and the evidence is there, and it clearly happened. But just as Hitler
showed, if any lie is told often enough, people begin to believe it,
especially if it is even printed.
Here is something that was in print yesterday from a man named Martin
Greenfield from foxnews.com, and these are Martin Greenfield's words.
Mr. Greenfield said:
Seventy years ago, I was in a Nazi concentration camp.
Since then, I have seen tyrants and dictators enter and exit
the global stage; yet as the world prepares to mark the 70th
anniversary of the Auschwitz liberation, it is perhaps well
and right that we reflect on how the Holocaust shocked the
moral imagination on a scale the world could scarcely fathom.
Why ponder such things? Because for far too many, the
Holocaust remains a mystery. A major poll taken last year of
53,000 people found that just 54 percent had ever heard of
the Holocaust. Knowledge of Auschwitz is likely even more
limited, particularly among young people. Past surveys have
shown that nearly half of Britons had never heard of
Auschwitz. Some schoolchildren even thought Auschwitz was a
type of beer.
Here at home in America, a debate erupted last year when a
teenager posted a smiling selfie at Auschwitz. Whatever your
opinion on the appropriateness of her actions, I was at least
pleased to be reminded that some young Americans still visit
the Nazi concentration camp to learn history up close.
I, too, visited Auschwitz as a teenager. In 1944, my family
and I stood in line before Dr. Josef Mengele--the Nazi
physician known as the ``Angel of Death''--as my mother,
grandparents, two sisters, and baby brother were
[[Page H656]]
all sent to the left to be burned in Hitler's ovens. My
father and I were sent to the right.
The first night inside Auschwitz, my father said we must
separate because, together, we would suffer double.
He quoted his father, ``On your own, you will survive,'' his father
told him. ``You are young and strong, and I know you will survive. If
you survive by yourself, you must honor us by living, by not feeling
sorry for us. This is what you must do.''
That was the last time I ever saw my father. I am grateful
for my father's words of grace and guidance. They echo in my
heart even still. It is a cruel thing, feeling guilty for
surviving, but my father erased any future guilt and replaced
it with purpose. It was a gift only a father's wisdom could
give. It gave me a reason to go forward, a reason to be. It
does still.
Part of heeding my father's words involved replacing the
horrors of my Holocaust past with a life spent creating
beauty in the form of hand-tailored suits for U.S.
Presidents, Hollywood films, and the world's most influential
men.
In fact, my first sewing lesson took place in the Auschwitz
concentration camp laundry when I accidentally ripped the
collar of a Nazi soldier's shirt. A guard beat me before a
kind, older inmate taught me how to sew a simple stitch to
repair the torn shirt. It was hardly the ideal tailoring
apprenticeship, but it was my first lesson in the skill that
became my livelihood.
But at 86, another part of honoring my father's wishes
requires being a voice for the voiceless. Indeed, as parents,
educators, and citizens, we must all do our part to help
ensure that ``Never Forget'' remains much more than a
threadbare catchphrase that gathers dust and loses meaning
with each passing year.
For example, many people are surprised to learn that
Auschwitz was actually a complex comprised of three main
camps and dozens of satellites. The United States Holocaust
Memorial Museum's statistics estimate that between 1940 and
1945, at least 1.1 million Jews and 200,000 of Hitler's
undesirables were sent to the Auschwitz complex. Of those,
1.1 million were murdered.
As I have noted elsewhere, that number would have been far
greater were it not for the courage of the American soldiers,
sailors, airmen, and marines who traveled around the world to
defeat a moral darkness that consumed at least 6 million
Jewish souls.
That is a lesson worthy of remembrance. The 70th
anniversary of the liberation marks that moment when freedom
conquered barbarism through sureness of virtue and strength
of will. Sadly, as recent events reveal, that remains a
lesson humanity must learn and relearn from generation to
generation.
The word ``Holocaust'' means sacrifice by fire. May the
memory of the millions who were engulfed in the flames like
my family never be forgotten.
That is Martin Greenfield, 70 years after being liberated from
Auschwitz death camp.
There is another article from CBC News. Aleksandra Sagan includes
this regarding Mordechai Ronen, 82, born with the family name
Markovits. He would be making a second visit to Auschwitz for the
commemoration ceremonies.
At nearly 12, Ronen saw Auschwitz for the first time as a
prisoner after soldiers forced all the Jews in his Hungarian
town into a ghetto and, 2 weeks later, shipped them in cattle
cars to the camp.
Dr. Josef Mengele, the Nazis' Angel of Death, sent Ronen's
mother and two sisters to the gas chambers on arrival. Young
Ronen made a lifesaving decision when he held on to his
father's hand and joined the line of men.
He spent about 2 weeks at Auschwitz, where he witnessed
soldiers using an infant for target practice and slept on
piles of corpses to avoid selection for the gas chamber.
He and his father were moved to a nearby labor camp where
the brutality continued. One day, his father told Ronen he
could no longer get up to work for the cement brigade. Ronen
last saw his father as soldiers took him away. It is the only
day he remembers crying and the day he decided to survive.
Ronen was liberated from a third camp, Gunskirchen, and
remembers walking to a nearby town, knocking on a resident's
door and asking if he could take a shower.
Ronen, who prefers to be called a ``victorer'' rather than
a survivor, first returned to Auschwitz in 1999, when he
guided then-Prime Minister Jean Chretien around the grounds.
It is important to Ronen to show the world he is alive and
to share the history of the Holocaust.
``Maybe the world will realize what we went through, and it
will be the end, and we are going to have peace and quiet in
the world,'' he explains.
Unfortunately, it is not the end of horrors. Tragically, Christians
now are being killed, persecuted, and tortured in greater numbers than
ever in the history of the world.
{time} 1130
Anti-Semitism, hatred against Jews, is growing like I couldn't have
imagined. In college, when I studied in history, I couldn't have
imagined the kind of anti-Jewish hatred, the kind of anti-Semitism that
would be growing as it has, and the United States of America would be
doing precious little about it instead of standing up for the Jewish
people and calling out anti-Semitism where it exists and where it grows
and proliferates, as it does in the United Nations, for example, as it
has in Europe, as it has in England, as it has right here in America.
It is unconscionable that at a time in world history when the United
States is said to be the true superpower of the world--even as that
power has been seen as diminishing by people around the world, as
polling indicates around the world, but still to be seen as the great
superpower--as anti-Jewish hatred grows and we do precious little about
it, and even at times stoke those flames, even in our universities, who
are so proud of accepting massive amounts of money from people who are
part of organizations that hate Jews and fund such courses or seminars
on things like Islamophobia, not a liberated mental process of
recognizing anti-Semitism, recognizing Jewish hatred--no, stoking those
flames against the Jewish people. It is unbelievable that it is
happening here in America as well.
And it is even more unbelievable that it is happening among what some
would refer to as the intelligentsia, those who are supposed to be more
enlightened than the rest of a nation, who see things as they truly
are. And yet, in America, some of those supposed enlightened
intelligentsia are growing to be some of the most anti-Semitic people
in the country.
How did all this happen? Money for one thing, political power for
another. But it has to stop. Money and initially power in Nazi Germany
stoked the flames of anti-Jewish hatred. But there is anti-Christian
hatred growing as well. Radical Islam has proliferated around the
world. Violent radical Islam has grown. They aren't junior varsities.
These are literal cutthroats who have to be stopped.
It is not enough for the United States administration to beg radical
Islamists, Jew- and Christian-hating leaders to sit at the table or
offer to let their murderers go free if they will just sit down and
visit with us, reminiscent of what Jimmy Carter wanted to do after an
act of war was committed against our Embassy, and in the 36 years that
have followed, what appeared to radical Islamists as a weak, paper
tiger, toothless America did nothing but beg to sit down and talk and
try to encourage Iran to let our prisoners go. It was not until Ronald
Reagan took office they were released. They never wanted to fight the
United States superpower.
That has been changed over the years. Since '79, when they committed
an act of war, attacked our Embassy, around the world people have been
shown: Oh, you can do that against the United States and get away with
it. The good thing is they may end up leaving your country and then
they may offer to give you money. They may offer to release murderers
from prison so they can come back and help kill more Americans. You
know, they are not very smart over there in the United States. That has
been going on since 1979.
It is tragic when we encourage radical Islamist holocausts, which is
what they would like to do, they said they were going to do, by letting
the murderers go. How could this administration for months now think
that Yemen was a great example of moderate Islam working out? I have
known since a constituent months ago was in jeopardy, and we were able
to get special ops people to help get them out.
According to them, the Embassy was attacked many months ago. Back at
the time Embassy personnel officially said: ``No, it was a nearby
attack, but it wasn't us.'' When the Iranian-backed Houthis, the
radical Islamists in Yemen, were taking over the capital and taking
over the country--and instead of standing up firmly against them and
protecting our American interests we were releasing murderers, radical
Islamic murderers--we were talking about how wonderful things were in
Yemen. That is exactly how the kind of anti-Jewish, anti-Christian
sentiment could grow to the point of having a holocaust.
[[Page H657]]
It is literally breathtaking for an administration not to understand
that while it is trying to placate radical Islamic leaders in Iran and
telling them: ``We just want to talk. As long as you will keep talking
to us, we will keep Israel from protecting themselves to their own
detriment. Just keep talking to us and you keep those centrifuges
spinning, that is fine with us.''
Now we know, we have been informed, that the administration has taken
complete dismantlement of the centrifuges and their equipment to help
them create nuclear weapons off the table. It is not even something
they are demanding anymore. In other words, the word is out that this
administration is apparently okay with Iran getting nukes but just
would prefer that it wait until after this President leaves office. It
doesn't matter when a President leaves office. If an administration
gives bloodthirsty zealots the ability to create a holocaust, history
does not forgive them simply because they had already left office when
the holocaust actually started.
Nigeria doesn't need us to send troops to stop the radical Islamists
there, but they need help. Boko Haram continues to kill, rape, torture.
There it is about going after Christians. The small-scale holocausts
that Boko Haram is creating don't get so much as a whimper these days
from this administration. They may say a few words, but they are hollow
and they do not affect Boko Haram as they continue to be emboldened.
Just like when the IRS was caught redhanded being weaponized and used
as a Democratic political tool, which appears to have violated criminal
law--yes, we have had hearings, but we haven't held them accountable.
And, therefore, it seems to have encouraged even more impropriety by
people within the IRS.
When people get caught in impropriety and don't pay a cost, then you
see what we are seeing in Nigeria, you see what we are seeing in
Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Syria, in Iran, in Iraq, and in Libya.
Oh, I know the President, his administration, bragged about the Arab
Spring and about taking out Qadhafi, who had become an ally after he
gave up any efforts for nuclear weapons, completely opened his defenses
to the United States. This administration and the prior administration
had agreements with Qadhafi. But this administration never lets
agreements get in the way of helping radical Islamists.
Because this administration did help radical Islam turn Libya into a
smoking country where people die, where our own people were not
protected, because of the fantasy of those who thought that somehow the
name, the United States, would be adequate to keep Chris Stevens and
the other Americans safe in Benghazi. We didn't need to give them added
security like they asked for, we didn't even need to respond when Chris
Stevens called and said they were under attack--never said anything
about a video because it was not.
But that smokescreen worked. The President got reelected. He didn't
have to account for that before the election, still hasn't had to
account for where he was and why help was not forthcoming.
I mean, even after 20 hours this administration that had planes--we
know for sure within 3\1/2\ hours--after 20 hours they get a private
plane there, that is it. David Ubben, with most of his leg, right leg,
blown off, no painkillers, no morphine, they don't have a C-130 that
they land to take him up in on a gurney. They get a private plane from
somebody who wasn't even American, and they have to knock David up
against the door, turning the gurney every which way trying to get him
in, without painkillers, causing more pain, more suffering, because
this administration, apparently they were thinking that if they sent
more help than just a private plane like that, a military plane, if
that were sent, it might look like Libya were not the wonderful country
that this administration helped create by bombing Qadhafi out of
existence.
And, yes, it was not, it is true, it was not a U.S. bomb that took
Qadhafi out. But our bombs put him on the run, our bombs stopped his
caravan. Our President wouldn't respond for 3 days after Qadhafi
offered to leave in exile and avoid any bloodshed before it all
started. This administration didn't respond. Obviously, they were okay
with having bloodshed and Qadhafi being wiped out. So they got what
they were hoping for, obviously.
{time} 1145
But what do we have now?
We have a country in Libya that is in absolute turmoil. By the way,
because Libya is in turmoil due to this administration, they are
helping turn Egypt into as much turmoil as they can. Thank God for
President el-Sisi. In having met with him on more than one occasion, I
was impressed by the man. Before he was President, he asked that we
bring back a message to this administration since this administration--
this President--froze the helicopters that were being sent, the
Apaches. The question was: Does this administration--does this
President--not understand that we use the Apache helicopters to keep
the Suez Canal open?
Although there were some that bought Morsi's lies that he was
deweaponizing the Sinai--supposedly to diminish the threat to Israel
from the Sinai--and after Morsi was removed for his unconstitutional
actions, not in a coup but in an uprising, which was a peaceful
revolution by reportedly over 30 million of their 90 million people,
they found that the Sinai had been dramatically weaponized and had been
contributing weapons equipment to Gaza to help threaten and cause
terror to Israel.
Once again, whether it is the Sinai, Gaza, northern Israel that was
given to Lebanon, it seems going back to the very inception of Israel--
back when Israel was first brought, according to the Bible, into the
Promised Land--we know of Canaan. The Canaanites no longer exist, so
other people claim it who are not Canaanites. Actually, the Israelis
had claim to it after the Canaanites. Others who occupied the land back
over 3,000 years ago don't exist. This land, according to the Bible,
was given to the children of Israel. It seems to be true that there has
never been a time when Israel gave away land when trying to buy peace
that that land that they gave away was not used as a staging area from
which to attack it.
Gaza, what a noble thing to do by the Israelis. They took an area
that was prosperous, self-sustaining, with greenhouses growing
vegetables that would feed the people who lived there. An amazing place
was the Gaza Strip. Then some noble Israeli leaders thought, Do you
know what? It is not required. We are getting absolutely nothing in
return, but we are going to do the unilateral act that will be so
noble, that will be so full of grace that the world, even those who
don't like us, will go, Wow. Those Israelis, they are okay. They are
nice folks.
Look, they didn't get anything in return; yet they still gave away
the Gaza Strip. What a wonderful group of people. I mean, that just
doesn't happen. The United States never gave back its land to England
or to Spain or to France or to other countries that initially had
claims here. Other countries don't do that, but Israel did. They gave
away the Gaza Strip. Previous to that, they had given away what
northern Israel now calls southern Lebanon. Southern Lebanon, people
will recall, has been the site of attacks on Israelis--war.
So how was this grace, this beneficence of Israel's giving the Gaza
Strip to the Palestinians, rewarded? It has been rewarded by their
giving back to Israel thousands upon thousands upon thousands of
rockets. Some kill. All terrorize. All cost money to Israel.
The most important problem they have created is the threat to life,
the threat to their existence; and we still have people in this country
who say, Well, if you just keep giving away land, eventually, they will
be satisfied, when the very materials that are being promoted by the
people this administration supports among the Islamists--they made very
clear the reason we name holidays, streets, areas, parks after suicide
bombers who kill innocent children, women, men is that we, ultimately,
are going to destroy Israel and wipe it off the map. We hate Jews that
much; and this administration thinks, somehow, they will bring radical
Islam around to really being this group of peace.
Now, there is a document that was an exhibit in the United States v.
the Holy Land Foundation in which there were many individuals and
groups named as coconspirators. They were
[[Page H658]]
not indicted, but they were named as coconspirators. It includes the
Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, which has a nice office
building just up the street here, and the Islamic Society of North
America, ISNA, the leader of which is Imam Magid, who goes to the White
House, who goes to the State Department, who advises the President and
let's him know when somebody is criticizing Islam, so the
administration steps in and goes after him.
In this exhibit from the Holy Land Foundation trial--it was the
biggest funding of terrorism case ever in U.S. history, and people who
were involved originally had indicated the goal was to convict these
first five, to name all of these coconspirators, and if we get
convictions of those first five, like we think we should, then we
proceed and go after the remainder. They were convicted in late 2008.
President Obama took office a month or two later, and this
administration would under no circumstances go after these people who
had been alleged in the documents of funding radical Islamic terrorism
even after the U.S. District Court in Dallas and the U.S. Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals in New Orleans confirmed that there was plenty of
evidence to support that someone like ISNA or CAIR was a legitimate
coconspirator named in the indictment and that their names would not be
removed.
I have asked for years now of the Justice Department to make
available the documents that were provided to the convicted
terrorists--those funding terrorism or terrorists--and this
administration now, for years, has drug their feet and has refused to
provide all of the documents that were provided to the terrorists.
On one occasion, the Attorney General basically said there are issues
here of privilege, and my point was--and is--you gave them to the
terrorists; surely, you can give them to Members of Congress. But the
answer is, no, they can't. They are going to keep obfuscating. They
don't want us to see all of the documents that they had in their
possession that they gave to the terrorists. I have a feeling, if we
saw all of the documents, it would be very, very clear in the purging
that this administration has done of our training materials of the
FBI's, of the intelligence agency's, of the State Department's, and the
Justice Department's that, if there is anything that might bother a
radical Islamist who wants to kill us, then it has to be removed. They
removed it.
In the document from a 1991 meeting, in what is called an
``Explanatory Memorandum,'' it spells out their goals. It was written
in 1991 by a member of the board of directors of the Muslim Brotherhood
in North America and by a senior Hamas leader named Mohamed Akram. It
had been approved by the Muslim Brotherhood's Shura Council and
Organizational Conference, and it was meant for internal review by the
Muslim Brotherhood leadership in Egypt. It was not intended for public
consumption. These are the words from the introduction that is part of
this document from the Center for Security Policy.
Mr. Speaker, I want to quote from the document, itself, prepared by
the Muslim Brotherhood in 1991, setting their goals for America:
One: The Memorandum is Derived from:
One, the general strategic goal of the group in America,
which was approved by the Shura Council and the
Organizational Conference for the year 1987, is: ``Enablement
of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective
and stable Islamic movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood
which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally and
which works to expand the observant Muslim base; aims at
unifying and directing Muslims' efforts; presents Islam as a
civilization alternative; and supports the global Islamic
state--if that name sounds familiar--wherever it is.''
Two, the priority that is approved by the Shura Council for
the work of the group in its current and former session,
which is ``settlement.''
Skipping down to ``Two: An Introduction to the Explanatory
Memorandum,'' it says:
The question we are facing is: ``How do you like to see the
Islam movement in North America in 10 years?'' or ``taking
along'' the following sentence when planning and working
``Islamic Work in North America in the year 2000: A strategic
vision.''
It goes on:
Also, we must summon and take along elements of the general
strategic goal of the group in North America.
For those large numbers of people in college who may not realize,
North America is where we live.
The document says:
I will intentionally repeat them in numbers. They are:
One, establishing an effective and stable Islamic movement
led by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Two, adopting Muslims' causes domestically and globally.
Three, expanding the observant Muslim base.
Four, unifying and directing Muslim efforts.
Five, presenting Islam as a civilization alternative.
Six, supporting the establishment of the global Islamic
state, wherever it is.
{time} 1200
The document says:
It must be stressed that it has become clear and
emphatically known that all is in agreement that we must
``settle'' or ``enable'' Islam and its movement in this part
of the world.
Three: The Concept of Settlement:
The term was mentioned in the group's ``dictionary'' and
documents with various meanings in spite of the fact that
everyone meant one thing with it. We believe that the
understanding of the essence is the same, and we will attempt
here to give the word and its ``meanings'' a practical
explanation with a practical movement tone and not a
philosophical linguistic explanation, while stressing that
this explanation of ours is not complete until our
explanation of ``the process'' of settlement itself is
understood which is mentioned in the following paragraph. We
briefly say the following:
Settlement: ``That Islam and its movement become a part of
the homeland it lives in.''
Establishment: ``That Islam turns into firmly rooted
organizations on whose bases civilization, structure, and
testimony are built.''
Further down, it goes on, ``That Islam is stable in the land.''
Rooting: ``That Islam is resident and not a passing thing
or rooted `entrenched' in the soil of the spot where it moves
and not a strange plant to it.''
Four: The Process of Settlement:
In order for Islam and its movement to become ``a part of
the homeland'' in which it lives--
Talking about North America.
--``stable'' in its land, ``rooted'' in the spirits and
minds of its people, ``enabled'' in the life of its society
and has firmly established ``organizations'' on which the
Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of
civilization is achieved, the movement must plan and struggle
to obtain ``the keys'' and the tools of this process in
carrying out this grand mission as a ``civilization
jihadist'' responsibility which lies on the shoulders of
Muslims and--on top of them--the Muslim Brotherhood in this
country.
Talking about here in the United States, North America.
``Among these keys and tools are the following.'' It goes on to talk
about the settlement concept and the fundamental shift toward
settlement of this country.
Number four:
Understanding the Role of the Muslim Brother in North
America:
The process of settlement is a ``civilization jihadist
process,'' with all the word means.
Anyway, it goes on.
Another place here, it says:
There is a conviction--with which this memorandum
disagrees--that our focus in attempting to settle Islam in
this country will lead to negligence in our duty towards the
global Islamic movement in supporting its project to
establish the state.
We believe that the reply is in two segments. One, the
success of the movement in America--
Talking about the United States of America.
One, the success of the movement in America in establishing
an observant Islamic base with power and effectiveness will
be the best support and aid to the global movement project.
And the second is the global movement has not succeeded yet
in ``distributing roles'' to its branches, stating what is
the needed from them as one of the participants or
contributors to the project to establish the global Islamic
state. The day this happens, the children of the American
Ikhwani branch will have far-reaching impact and positions
that make the ancestors proud.
It is a great document goal for taking over the United States, which
brings another story to the surface. It is from Bob Price from
breitbart.com. ``Islamic Tribunal Confirmed in Texas; Attorney Claims
'It's Voluntary,''' and it talks about the new Islamic tribunal in
Texas that has been confirmed now by Breitbart Texas.
The tribunal is operating as a nonprofit organization in Dallas.
Because when you understand the goals, if there is a major defeat or a
major success,
[[Page H659]]
Muslim Brotherhood requires a mosque be built there and a presence
there.
Naturally, they would want one at Ground Zero in New York; further,
they would want a mosque and a strong presence in Dallas which was,
they believe, the place of their big defeat when the Holy Land
Foundation principals were convicted and sent to prison.
I did want to point out, as we finish up here today, that the
President was giving an excellent speech in India about the importance
of stopping the global war on women. He didn't call it that. He only
calls it that for Republicans, but there is a war on women, and it is
not by Republicans. It is radical Islam and even some moderate
Islamists.
He is giving this talk about the importance of recognizing the
importance and the equality of women--or some of us might say they are
more equal than we are--but as he was doing that, this picture was on
Saudi television.
We have our United States President depicted here, and this is the
First Lady of the United States of America being blurred out by this
country's allies because she wasn't covered. Michelle Obama should
never need to be covered if she doesn't want to be; yet at the very
time our President is talking about equality of women, he fails to
notice that people that he considers allies are treating his own wife
like this.
Mr. Speaker, it is critical that we stand up against radical Islam or
any Islam that wants a settlement civilization jihad in America.
Anything and anybody who disagrees with the United States Constitution
and wants to destroy it, tear it down, is an enemy to the United States
and needs to be recognized as such and not welcomed with open arms at
the State Department and the White House.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________