[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 19 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H485-H489]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1815
PALESTINIAN TERRORISTS REMAIN UNPROSECUTED
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. Madam Speaker, news has come out, February 2, Groundhog
Day, in this article from Adam Kredo entitled, ``The Obama
Administration Has Not Prosecuted a Single Palestinian Terrorist Who
Killed Americans.''
``The Obama administration has not prosecuted a single Palestinian
terrorist responsible for killing Americans abroad, despite a
congressional mandate ordering the Justice Department to take action
against these individuals'' . . . ``Palestinian terrorists have
murdered at least 64 Americans, including two unborn children, since
1993. Yet the U.S. Government has failed to take legal action against
those who committed the crimes, lawmakers disclosed during a Tuesday
hearing on the Justice Department's failure to live up to its mandate
to bring these terrorists to justice.
``Many of the terrorists continue to roam free across the Middle
East, with one hosting a Hamas-affiliated television show in Jordan.
``With criticism mounting from Congress and U.S. victims of
terrorism, Justice Department officials say they are working to
initiate cases, but warn that this could take `many years' to play out.
``The Justice Department has repeatedly declined to comment when
faced with questions from Congress about the lack of prosecutions,
according to Representative Ron DeSantis of Florida, chair of the House
Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security.
``The Justice Department `has not been able to cite one example for
this committee of even a single terrorist who has been prosecuted in
the U.S. for any of the 64 attacks against Americans in Israel,'
DeSantis said. `Indeed, many of these terrorists roam free as the
result of prisoner exchanges or evasion.
`` `This is not what Congress intended' when it created the DOJ's
Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism in 2005,' DeSantis
added. `This is not what the American people want, and this does not
provide justice to the victims' families that has been so tragically
elusive.'
``The Justice Department has sought to evade questions about its
failure to prosecute known terrorists responsible for the murder of
U.S. citizens.
``This includes its failure to level charges against Ahlam Tamimi,
the Palestinian woman responsible for blowing up a Jerusalem pizza shop
in 2001. The attacks killed 15, including a pregnant American woman.
Tamimi currently resides in Jordan and hosts a television show on the
Hamas-owned Al Quds station.
`` `When the Oversight and Government Reform Committee questioned the
Department of Justice about this case, the Department declined to
comment,' DeSantis said. `If in fact bringing to justice the
perpetrators of terrorism against Americans in Israel is a high
priority for the DOJ, then surely people of this nature should be
prosecuted for their crimes.' '' . . . ``American victims of terrorist
attacks abroad who testified at the hearing offered sharp criticism of
the Justice Department for failing to take on terrorists in the U.S.
courts.
``Sari Singer, who was injured in a 2003 Palestinian terror attack on
a bus in Jerusalem, said that she has lost faith in the government.''
Singer said, ``I grew up believing that my country would be there for
me and protect me no matter where I was in the world. These last years
have left me feeling let down.''
I would insert parenthetically, Madam Speaker, that she shares that
same feeling with the victims in our State Department of the attacks at
Benghazi, and the many hours people waited thinking surely our
government will come to our aid.
So it sounds like victims of terrorists abroad share this, whether it
is from Benghazi or whether it is from other terrorist attacks, that
the administration is not going to be there for you.
The article goes on: ``Peter Schwartz, whose nephew Ezra was shot in
the head by a Palestinian terrorist in November 2015, said that the
Obama administration has not been forthcoming about any potential
investigations into the incident'' . . . ``The Obama administration was
criticized in August when it sought to limit the restitution American
victims of terrorism could receive. The administration argued in a
legal briefing issued to the court that a large cash award to these
victims could complicate the administration's efforts to foster peace
between Israel and the Palestinians.''
Clearly, the administration's interests, as Sari Singer observed, is
not with American victims of foreign terrorism. It is with the foreign
terrorists that maybe if we sidle up to them enough, maybe if we will
be nice to them and not punish them, then maybe they won't keep killing
American citizens. That is false thinking.
Madam Speaker, I can't help but think as we find out this week that
this administration has released $100 billion to the largest supporter
of terrorism in the world--Iran--and Iran has made clear that once they
got this money from the Obama administration that they were going to
increase their help to terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. In other
words, they told us in advance that when America cedes to Iran $100
billion extra, they are going to be able to help more terrorists commit
more of their acts of terrorism.
Now, back when I was a judge or even back years and years ago as a
prosecutor, we always approached cases that if you assisted somebody,
say you gave them money, and they told you before you gave them the
money that they are going to use some of this money to commit a
criminal act, then we always felt like you could prosecute those
people. Jurors could bear that out because if you knowingly aid,
assist--even encourage--you don't even have to give them money. If you
just encourage them to commit a violent act or encourage them to go
about what they plan to do, and they already said, ``We plan to commit
more terrorism with what you give us,'' then you were an accomplice.
Under the laws federally, and as well as in the laws I am aware of in
most States, certainly in Texas, you would be charged as a principal.
So if you gave money to someone knowing that they said, ``We are going
to use money and help kill people and help terrorism,'' and then they
committed the terrorism, you could be convicted of the same terrorism
of those you gave the money to help.
It is interesting that those principles seem to apply to all other
Americans, but this administration feels surely they won't apply to
this administration. Sure, Iran has said they are going to support more
terrorism once they get all this extra money from the Obama
administration. But apparently the Obama administration, according to
these pleadings they filed, if you just be nice to the terrorists, let
them keep their own money, gee, they will probably quit killing
Americans. It doesn't work that way.
Let's take a look at who this administration, this Commander in
Chief's administration, is willing to punish. I have a letter here that
was sent by my friend, our fellow colleague, Duncan Hunter, to the
chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee when he discusses Sergeant
First Class Charles Martland and points out he is considered a first-
rate warrior.
``While in Afghanistan in 2011, at a remote outpost, Martland
confronted an Afghan Local Police commander for kidnapping a young boy
and raping him repeatedly over several days. The issue was brought to
the attention of Martland and his fellow soldiers after the boy's
mother asked for help, after she also was attacked by the ALP--or
Afghan Local Police--commander.
{time} 1830
``When Martland and Captain Danny Quinn confronted the rapist, he
admitted to the charge and laughed in their faces--at which point
Martland and Quinn took matters into their own hands. This occurred
after two separate
[[Page H486]]
but similar human rights violations, including another rape, near the
outpost, resulting in no punitive action whatsoever.
``The Afghan Local Police commander was dragged to the perimeter
gate, where he was thrown out and told never to come back. It is
important to note that the Afghan Local Police commander left on his
own, only to deliberately exaggerate his injuries. Multiple sources
have confirmed this fact, including a linguist and authorities who were
never interviewed by Army investigators after the incident.
``For this action, Martland was removed from the outpost and faced
reprimand. He later was allowed to reenlist, only to face a Qualitative
Management Program review board in February 2015.''
That would be a year ago.
``The Army argued that the black mark on his record, which states he
assaulted `a corrupt Afghan commander' is cause to expel him from duty,
despite the fact that he has the full support of his command and
immediate leadership. In fact, the Department of Defense Inspector
General reported to me that''--this is a letter from Duncan Hunter--``
`personnel are very supportive of the Sergeant and his efforts to
remain in the U.S. Army. . . .' And there continue to be efforts within
his command to not 'inadvertently hamper his efforts.' This was in
response to an alleged gag order put on Martland and his fellow
soldiers''--apparently, about trying to stop the rapes that were going
on in Afghanistan.
``Importantly, Martland was permitted to resubmit an appeal to the
Qualitative Management Program decision after his first appeal was
denied outright. And recently, a decision within Army Human Resources
Command recommended that the Army uphold the judgment that Martland be
removed from service, although a final decision has yet to be made
about his future.''
Madam Speaker, we have an American hero in Sergeant First Class
Charles Martland. Dragging a child rapist out of the confined area that
this child rapist was using to be a serial rapist, doing harm to
children in Afghanistan, is an act of heroism, not an act to be
condemned. In fact, courts I am aware of, certainly juries in Texas,
would say that was acting in defense of a third person. This man is
guilty of nothing except a heroic act to save children and women from
being raped by a corrupt police commander.
But under this administration, where we give money to supporters of
terrorism, the largest supporters of terrorism in the world, and where
we beg courts not to give large reimbursements to victims of terrorism,
our own American victims of foreign terrorism because that might not
help, it might make the foreign terrorists mad if they have a judgment
against them, then it seems like this is perfectly consistent with the
policies of this administration. We give money to terrorists who say
they are going to use it to support terrorism; we don't give money to
victims of terrorism.
In fact, this administration should have done what the House passed
and implored the administration to do, and that is to make sure that
not a dime was allowed to be released to Iran until the verdicts
outstanding against Iran by American victims of Iranian terrorism were
paid first. But in its haste to get all this money to those who say
they are going to use a bunch of it to support terrorism, the American
victims were left in the lurch. It is more than irresponsible. It is
unconscionable what has been going on.
At some point, people in this administration have got to figure out
what most of the American people have figured out, and that is you are
not going to stop terrorism by trying to be sweet and kind to the
terrorists. Some of us learned it on the playground growing up. I guess
now that the Federal Government has control of education to such an
extent that schools are forced to teach to the test--I have even had
elementary schools tell me: We have had to do away with recess in
elementary school because we just don't have time. We have got to teach
them to the test so that we can get that Federal money and we can stay
open.
But if you allow recess and kids are on the playground and you have
kids that were smaller like I was, you learn you are not going to stop
bullying by giving your money to a bully. If you give a bully money,
not only do they not respect you, they have more contempt and it
encourages their bullying. You can't do that. You have to stand up to
bullying. You find out when you do that, sometimes you will have a
teacher, like my fifth grade teacher, that took up for the bullies, but
you will ultimately find more teachers will not tolerate that kind of
conduct.
This administration never learned that. Maybe there was no chance to
learn that in the young schools in Indonesia. Maybe that is why we have
a Commander in Chief that thinks we should reward the terrorists, the
supporters of terrorism, and punish the victims of terrorism by not
letting them have proper financial restitution.
But it is tragic what is going on. It is tragic.
There are a number of stories about Sergeant Martland, including from
my friend Jay Sekulow. He said:
``Yet, for his actions, he was immediately pulled from the
battlefield and this decorated war hero is now facing expulsion from
the military.''
This administration's priorities are so completely out of step with
truth, justice, and the American way--what used to be the American way.
Perhaps the American way has been fundamentally transformed in the last
7 years, so now the American way has become that we help terrorists,
give them money, and we punish those who are victims.
Well, of course, we know that our Secretary of State thanked Iran for
their activities. I haven't heard whether or not Secretary of State
Kerry has thanked Iran for this latest story. This from foxnews.com,
``Iran's Supreme Leader Awards Medals to Troops Who `Captured' U.S.
Sailors.'' The story says:
``Iran's supreme leader has awarded medals to five members of the
Iranian Navy whom he said 'captured intruding' U.S. Navy sailors during
a tense incident in January.
``Ayatollah Ali Khamenei awarded the Order of Fat'h medal to Admiral
Ali Fadavi, the head of the navy of the Revolutionary Guards, and four
commanders who seized the two U.S. Navy vessels, according to Reuters.
Iran's state media reported the news on Sunday.
``Order of Fat'h given by Chief Commander of Armed Forces to IRGC
Navy commanders who captured intruding U.S. marines''. . .``In a tweet
from his account Sunday, Khamenei misidentified those who were
`captured' as being members of the Marines.
``On January 12, Iran captured the ten sailors whose boats
`misnavigated' into Iranian waters, according to Defense Secretary Ash
Carter. Though the sailors were released the following day, Iran
released video of the sailors being captured, detained and apologizing
for the incursion.
``Though Iran initially accused the sailors of spying, Fadavi later
said an investigation had established the sailors were led astray by `a
broken navigation system' and the trespassing was `not hostile or for
spying purposes'.
``The sailors were attempting to navigate from Kuwait to Bahrain when
they crossed into Iranian waters.''
Well, Madam Speaker, we have got satellites that could show exactly
what happened. I would think that if this administration wanted to
defend our sailors, they would show the satellite footage of where they
were and we would be able to see for sure whether or not they did cross
into Iranian waters.
But consistent with these reports and stories we have already looked
at this evening, it seems if they are going to act consistent with this
administration's prior actions, this administration wouldn't want to
embarrass the Iranian military, the supporters of terrorism, and so we
wouldn't want to show that they were liars. So we won't show by
satellite footage exactly where our sailors were, and we won't show
exactly where our other naval vessels were. These were reported to be
small vessels. Well, you don't have small Navy vessels unless they are
near much larger Navy vessels. Normally, if they are larger Navy
vessels, there are other small vessels that can go rather quickly.
If you have the Navy vessels there, there is a good chance there is a
carrier nearby, an airstrip, where jets could be there in no time
whatsoever. It used to
[[Page H487]]
be under other Commanders in Chief, not this one, but other Commanders
in Chief, that if we had sailors who were in danger of being captured
by a country, particularly the largest supporter of terrorism in the
world, our jets would be put in the air. They would get there
immediately. They would keep flying overhead and protecting those
sailors until the Navy itself could get there to rescue them.
For some reason, this administration thought it was a better idea not
to put our aircraft in the air--kind of reminiscent of Benghazi. We are
not going to send aircraft that could have been there in minutes. But,
heck, I was asking a former commander at Ramstein Air Base clear up in
Germany. He didn't realize where I was going.
I asked: How long would it take, say, to get to North Africa from
Ramstein?
He said: About 3, 3\1/2\ hours at the most.
I said: So you could have been at Benghazi in 3\1/2\ hours?
He said: Oh, well, we had ordnance on the planes that particular
evening, and it would have taken awhile to reconfigure those.
Well, if you can get clear from Ramstein Air Base to Benghazi in 3,
3\1/2\ hours, tops--we have got planes a whole lot closer to where
these Navy vessels were--they should have been able to be there in
minutes. I am sure some commander or some admiral who is afraid of the
Commander in Chief would never admit that, not these days.
But the fact is this once proud United States military who protected
its own for the last 70 years and now it calls upon the largest
supporter of terrorism to come get our sailors and to have them kneel
on their knees, hands behind their heads, as if they are POWs,
embarrass them to the maximum, for that, Secretary of State Kerry
thanked Iran.
Well, Madam Speaker, I see my friend from Nebraska is here. I yield
to my friend.
{time} 1845
Nebraska Values
Mr. FORTENBERRY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
yielding.
I want to point out something about Mr. Gohmert. He was speaking
about our military a moment ago. He, himself, is a veteran. He served
in the United States Army during the Vietnam war, and I appreciate his
service.
Madam Speaker, I also want to share something with the body today. I
write a weekly report, generally, called the Fort Report. This week, I
sent one that I hoped would have a broader meaning to the House of
Representatives and, perhaps, to anyone else who might encounter this.
It is entitled, ``Nebraska Values.'' It is stories about America's
political and economic and cultural crises. As we all know, they are
dominating the headlines across our Nation. There is widespread,
bipartisan dissatisfaction with the status quo, and it is propelling a
new conversation against the dysfunction and gridlock that have long
thwarted effective government here in Washington, D.C.
As families across our Nation face pressing challenges, it is sad,
but elected officials often prioritize divisive rhetoric instead of
empathy and understanding. Now our disagreements have widened into
chasms. It is exhausting--exhausting to America's spirit--and it is
distracting us from the possibilities that are before us. In the midst
of this contentious Presidential primary season, Madam Speaker, maybe
it is time to just pause, change the subject, and celebrate some of the
best examples that our country has to offer.
In a small town gym in Beemer, Nebraska, at Beemer Elementary School,
the community recently gathered to celebrate the life of Joseph Lemm.
While deep sadness marked the occasion, the community's desire to
gather and tell stories and honor this remarkable man pointed to a much
deeper understanding of the values that bind us.
Joe chose to put on three different uniforms in his life--first, by
enlisting in the United States Air Force after high school. Then he
went on to have a career with the New York City Police Department and,
finally, with the New York Air National Guard. Joe served three tours
of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. This past December, Joseph Lemm gave
his all for his country, along with five other Americans who were
killed in Afghanistan. Although Joe left Nebraska a very long time ago,
I am quite certain that he carried his early formation with him
throughout his life of service, and I suspect my State, Nebraska, was
never far from Joe's heart.
Before the service that memorialized him, I saw Joe's mother,
Shirley. Shirley embraced me as though we were family members, and,
perhaps, we were. She embraced our Governor, Governor Ricketts, and
United States Senator Sasse in the same way. Everyone in the gym in the
little town of Beemer knew, in the midst of this deep grief and loss,
that Joseph Lemm's life had great value, had great purpose.
Madam Speaker, several weeks ago, Washington, D.C., was buried in an
avalanche of snow, the remnants of which are still around. I was
intending to come back to Washington but had to cancel that trip, and I
had more time than I had anticipated in my hometown of Lincoln. As I
was in my office, I noticed some young people who were walking around
the complex in their signature blue Future Farmers of America jackets,
the FFA jackets. I love those jackets, Madam Speaker. They are
emblazoned with the name of their hometown below the FFA symbol. These
young people had gathered along with others from the Distributive
Education Clubs of America; the Future Business Leaders of America; the
Family, Career and Community Leaders of America; Educators Rising; and
the Future Health Professionals Skills USA to talk about a very
important issue: food security.
In Nebraska, we are very fortunate to have a very, very low
unemployment rate. We have the convergence of some extraordinary
natural resources, that of our farming and ranch community; we have
manufacturing; we have a financial sector; we have had a long tradition
of solid community leadership, which has left our economic situation
much better than most across the country. Even so, even in our State,
we face problems with structural poverty.
These young students came together because they recognized the need
to engage in the issue of children who face hunger--of children who
return from school hungry, of children who have to worry about not
having enough to eat when they get up in the morning. These young
people were there, gathered to lead the way--to find realtime solutions
in their own small communities, to help the impoverished, vulnerable
members who are all around them.
Madam Speaker, that same snowstorm that kept me out of Washington,
though, did not deter hundreds of other Nebraska students who left the
comforts of their homes and drove on buses through the night to
exercise their fundamental American rights: the freedom to assemble and
the freedom of speech.
In the face of that devastating blizzard a couple of weeks ago, these
principled boys and girls participated in the annual March for Life.
They are young people in our country who refuse to accept the current
settlement in our wounded culture. They refuse to stare at pain and
woundedness and then walk away. They refuse to accept what has been
fostered upon us for the last four decades of brokenness, of fracturing
in family life, and the deep wounds that abortion has caused in so many
women. They are demanding that we do better as a country. They are
saying to all of us that women deserve better, that we deserve better.
They traveled to Washington to explicitly express this pro-life
perspective and to proclaim that we should care for unborn children,
for their mothers, and for our society as a whole.
This is the new generation--the Millennial Generation--that, in many
ways, is standing upon the ash heap of broken tradition, and they are
longing for more. They are saying there is a better way no matter how
deep and difficult the problem is. Although our Nation, particularly in
our politics, still experiences deep and sad divisions over the
question of abortion, I do think we should all commend these students
for responsibly exercising their rights to peaceably demonstrate, for
standing up for what they believe. That is a source of renewal and
strength in America. Sometimes it discomforts us. Sometimes it
challenges those of us in power when truth has spoken to us. Sometimes
it bumps up against systems that seem stacked against the ordinary
person.
[[Page H488]]
These young people are not willing to accept the current economic,
political, and cultural settlement in our country. They are saying
let's strive for more. Let's imagine what we could be. Let's put aside
the pain. Let's heal the past and look forward when all life is
celebrated as a beautiful gift. I respect what they did, and I think,
again, all of us here can look to these young people who have
responsibly demonstrated in front of us as good future stewards of a
rebuilt America.
So, Madam Speaker, that is really what I wanted to say to you today.
I am proud of these Nebraskans who have continued to demonstrate a
better pathway for America in public servants and in military heroes,
such as Joseph Lemm, who gave his life for his country, in the young
people back home who are deciding to tackle systemic childhood poverty
and hunger, and in the students who trekked all this way in hazardous
conditions to stand in defense of vulnerable persons.
Perhaps, in the example of these young people, we can find an answer
to what is right about America at a time when so much seems to be going
wrong. We can carry forward the best of our traditions, those put
forward by small communities and families that are really the renewing
social force that will help turn our country around.
Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, I am very grateful to my friend from
Nebraska. Mr. Fortenberry and I came in together, and I am so glad we
did. We have been friends ever since. What a noteworthy tribute he had
to pay. I am grateful for that tribute.
Madam Speaker, we have had so many Americans who have given, as
Lincoln said, the last full measure of devotion for freedom, for
liberty, for people who were not even Americans, because that is who
Americans have been.
I know our current President is fond of saying that is who we are,
and then he provides access to $100 billion for Iran--the largest
supporter of terrorism. It says it is going to keep supporting
terrorism, just with a lot more money now that the President has made
all of this available. The President says that is not who we are, and
then he shows us that we open our arms to terrorists from all over the
world.
So many Americans gave their lives and gave their limbs for liberty
in Iraq, for liberty in Afghanistan. In fact, in Afghanistan, if I
recall my figures correctly, in the 7\1/4\ years under Commander in
Chief Bush, from October of 2001 until January of 2009, there were just
over 500 precious American lives given for the cost of freedom in
Afghanistan. Supposedly, we were told by this President, the war was
pretty much over. He sent more troops for a while to Afghanistan; but
even after, supposedly, the war has been over and troops have been left
over there, we keep getting Americans killed.
It is because of the rules of engagement that so needlessly tie their
hands. It is because this administration would rather punish Green
Beret Sergeant First Class Martland for stopping a serial child rapist.
It would rather punish him--throw him out, end his military career--
because this administration, at least here in this country, does not
want to offend the serial child rapist in Afghanistan.
No wonder people around the world have lost so much respect for the
United States in the last 7 years. They know that stuff is going on.
They knew that Sergeant Martland stood up for the child and for the
woman. They knew what he did. They spread the word. Then the word
spreads when Sergeant Martland makes international news because this
administration wants to punish him for dragging him out of the
compound--not killing, not beheading, not disemboweling--in an act of
defense of many third persons. They find out this administration
punished the military hero, the Green Beret who protected the victims.
It is incredible. I mean, any administration that would do that would
probably turn around and, if it heard about some entity that was
allowing unborn babies to be killed and was selling body parts, might
be tempted to punish the people who exposed it instead of punishing
those who did such a heinous act.
{time} 1900
Those who have read Scripture know there will come a time when right
is wrong, wrong is right, the good are punished, and the evil are
rewarded. But we also know the day will come when the ultimate judge of
the world will set things straight.
So this is a story from Martha Mendoza, Maya Alleruzzo, and Bram
Janssen from the Associated Press: ``Oldest Christian monastery in Iraq
is razed.'' This is heartbreaking.
This is a monastery Americans were devoted to restoring. It is a
monastery where people came to know Jesus of Nazareth for the last 1400
years. It is a place where God did miracles in people's lives. It is a
place where our military were very, very careful to protect because
they knew the Christian significance.
As this administration miscalculated--apparently, our intelligence
agencies did not miscalculate. Apparently, our intelligence agencies
made very clear to this administration that ISIS is not a JV team, that
these are dangerous people and they have to be stopped and you have to
ramp it up.
So it wasn't our intelligence. We didn't have bad intelligence. The
reports are out there. The administration, thinking it knew better than
those on the ground in the area, did not take ISIS seriously.
Now, this Christian monastery over 1400 years old has been razed. The
story from Iraq:
``The oldest Christian monastery in Iraq has been reduced to a field
of rubble, yet another victim of the Islamic State group's relentless
destruction of ancient cultural sites.
``For 1,400 years the compound survived assaults by nature and man,
standing as a place of worship recently for U.S. troops. In earlier
centuries, generations of monks tucked candles in the niches and prayed
in the cool chapel. The Greek letters chi and rho, representing the
first two letters of Christ's name, were carved near the entrance.
``Now satellite photos obtained exclusively by The Associated Press
confirm the worst fears of church authorities and preservationists--St.
Elijah's Monastery of Mosul has been completely wiped out.
``In his office in exile in Irbil, Iraq, the Rev. Paul Thabit Habib,
39, stared quietly at before- and after-images of the monastery that
once perched on a hillside above his hometown of Mosul. Shaken, he
flipped back to his own photos for comparison.
`` `I can't describe my sadness,' he said in Arabic. `Our Christian
history in Mosul is being barbarically leveled. We see it as an attempt
to expel us from Iraq, eliminating and finishing our existence in this
land.'
``The Islamic State group, which broke from al-Qaeda and now controls
large parts of Iraq and Syria, has killed thousands of civilians and
forced out hundreds of thousands of Christians, threatening a religion
that has endured in the region for 2,000 years. Along the way, its
fighters have destroyed buildings and ruined historical and culturally
significant structures they consider contrary to their interpretation
of Islam.''
Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that these writers know what
leaders in this administration still, after all these years, have not
figured out. It is Martha Mendoza, Maya Alleruzzo, and Bram Janssen.
They point out in this article that these people believe that these
sites are contrary to their interpretation of Islam. Yet, this
administration says, no, it has nothing to do with Islam.
The article continues:
``Those who knew the monastery wondered about its fate after the
extremists swept through in June 2014 and largely cut communications to
the area.
``Now, St. Elijah's has joined a growing list of more than 100
demolished religious and historic sites, including mosques, tombs,
shrines and churches in Syria and Iraq. The extremists have defaced or
ruined ancient monuments in Nineveh, Palmyra and Hatra. Museums and
libraries have been looted, books burned, artwork crushed--or
trafficked.
`` `A big part of tangible history has been destroyed,' said Rev.
Manuel Yousif Boji. A Chaldean Catholic pastor in Southfield, Michigan,
he remembers attending Mass at St. Elijah's almost 60 years ago while a
seminarian in Mosul.'
`` `These persecutions have happened to our church more than once,
but we
[[Page H489]]
believe in the power of truth, the power of God,' said Boji. He is part
of the Detroit area's Chaldean community, which became the largest
outside Iraq after the sectarian bloodshed that followed the U.S.
invasion in 2003. Iraq's Christian population has dropped from 1.3
million then to 300,000 now, church authorities say.''
Christians are under persecution, being killed in greater numbers
than any time in our history. Yet, it is not the Christians being
persecuted in greater numbers than any time in history. It is not the
group that many in the world recognize are the most persecuted religion
in the world.
This administration wants to welcome those of the religion of
persecution rather than the most persecuted group in the world, that
being Christians, although just recently this article from CNS News,
``550 Syrian Refugees Admitted to U.S. Since the Paris Attacks''--and,
of the most persecuted highest number killed in the history of the
world, Christians, this administration admitted two.
An article from the Texas Tribune points out that Governor Greg
Abbott and my friend, Democrat U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, ``pressed the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Monday to explain why the
agency plans to reduce its aerial surveillance on the Texas-Mexico
border.''
``Monday's request comes as CBP is reporting a new surge in the
number of undocumented immigrants crossing the Rio Grande. From October
to December of 2015, about 10,560 unaccompanied minors entered Texas
illegally through the Rio Grande Valley sector of the U.S. Border
Patrol. That marks a 115 percent increase over the same time frame in
2014.''
Madam Speaker, what is clear is that, as this administration says,
oh, we are arresting fewer people coming into the country illegally,
these kind of reports make clear, well, yeah, if you close your eyes,
you will keep arresting even fewer. That is what they are doing. They
are closing our eyes to our ability to see people that are violating
our law.
At the same time, we get this report from the Washington Examiner
that sanctuary cities now cross the 300 mark, with Dallas and
Philadelphia added to it.
Madam Speaker, with so much to be depressed about, I want to commend
the people of the State of Iowa, where I spent a couple of days last
week and where I have spent other times many days in the past. When I
am among the Iowans, I feel like I am back home in East Texas. The
people are wonderful.
I had somebody ask earlier today about: What do you think about your
party?
I said: What do you mean?
He said: Well, you look at the people that won the Iowa caucuses.
So?
The comment was made: Well, in the Democratic caucus or primary, you
had two White Socialists--this was the comment from this person--and in
the Republican primary, the first and third vote-getters were Cuban,
Hispanic Americans, and the fourth was African American. Isn't that
interesting the way things have turned?
Well, I have enjoyed coming to love the people of Iowa, and I look
forward to the days ahead because of them.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________