[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 10877-10881]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND BROKEN PROMISES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  These can be the best of times and the worst of times. There is still 
so much potential. This country has so much in the way of assets. It is 
interesting to hear my friends across the aisle talk about the wonders 
of ObamaCare, but I know this President has said before: if you make 
more than $250,000, you won't ever have your taxes raised. I won't ever 
raise your taxes.
  He has said it a lot of different ways. Yet, when I read his version 
of the American Jobs Act, which he, himself, pushed for, promulgated, 
demanded be passed, it actually raised taxes on everybody who made more 
than $125,000. So he broke the promise there.
  In ObamaCare, it's very clear that, if you make just above the 
poverty line and if you can't afford the kind of Cadillac insurance 
that is demanded that you purchase, you're going to get hammered with a 
tax, and it will ultimately be 2\1/2\ percent in extra income tax. He 
basically has pushed through a bill that makes war with those who can 
least afford to buy health insurance--adding a 2\1/2\ percent tax to 
the people who are the most vulnerable and hardworking folks. They're 
just trying to get by, and they're going to have to pay an extra 2\1/2\ 
percent in income tax?
  Now, the enlightened Chief Justice explains through pages 11 through 
15 of his opinion that it's actually not a tax, that it's clearly a 
penalty because, if you don't buy the insurance at the high level the 
government will dictate, then it will be necessary for you to pay an 
extra hunk of income tax--those who are the hardworking, least able to 
afford it. I don't see how anybody can say, It's great, and a happy day 
for you.
  If you go through the rest of his opinion, of course he says the 
Commerce Clause doesn't make the ObamaCare bill constitutional; but 
then he gets around to saying, Well, regardless of what Congress called 
it--you know, they called it a penalty--we'll just say it's a penalty 
for the purposes of jurisdiction so that it allows us to take up the 
case; but for purposes of whether or not it's constitutional, we'll 
call it what it is--a tax. It's one of the worst decisions this Chief 
Justice has ever made, and it's one of the worst I've ever read--poorly 
written by a man who should have known better.
  But this administration has broken so many promises. It had 
negotiations with Egyptian leader Mubarak. We are certainly ready to 
throw him under the bus just as they have our allies, the Northern 
Alliance, that successfully fought and defeated the Taliban within a 
matter of months with our assistance but with less than 500 U.S. 
military in country. Now, after the President added troops and we had 
over 100,000 troops, this administration is ready to turn the country 
over to President Karzai and the Taliban. The Taliban has been on 
national television, saying, Hey, obviously, by virtue of the Obama 
administration's begging us to come to the table, promising they'll 
release some of our murdering thugs from confinement and that they'll 
buy us first-class offices in Qatar, well, gee, it's obvious to the 
world, they've said, that the United States has lost the war in 
Afghanistan.
  Congratulations, President Barack Obama, for making it clear to the 
Taliban that you have lost the war for us.
  Now we are advised the President has invited Egypt's Islamist leader 
to the United States. Past administrations have recognized the Muslim 
Brotherhood's end goal of a giant, worldwide caliphate where we all 
fall prey under sharia law and where we all have freedom, but that 
freedom is to only worship Allah and where we have justice but that 
justice is only under sharia; and this administration is embracing them 
wholeheartedly.
  In this article of July 8, Sunday, from Business and Financial News, 
it headlines: ``Obama Invites Egypt's Islamist Leader to U.S.'' It 
talks about how President Barack Obama has invited Egypt's newly 
elected Islamist President, Mohamed Morsi, to visit the United States 
in September.
  It reads:

       Washington, long weary of Islamists and an ally of ousted 
     President Hosni Mubarak, shifted policy last year to open 
     formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood, the group behind 
     Morsi's win.

  It reads:

       Morsi formally resigned from the group after his victory, 
     but nowhere is there an indication that Egypt's new President 
     has disavowed the effort to make the United States, which 
     they've called the Great Satan, subservient to sharia law.

  In fact, as to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's leader as posted 
yesterday in The Blaze:

       Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood chairman, Muhammad Badi, also 
     known as the group's ``Supreme Guide''--this would be the 
     Supreme Guide over the newly elected Egyptian leader--said 
     last week that waging jihad against Israel is an imperative 
     for every Muslim. Middle East watcher Raymond Ibrahim, who 
     scours the Arabic press and translates it to English for 
     Western eyes, posted this revelation on his blog.

  Then it sets out this quote:

       According to last Thursday's edition of Al Wafd, during his 
     weekly sermon, ``Muhammad Badi, the Muslim Brotherhood's 
     Supreme Guide, confirmed the necessity for every Muslim to 
     strive to save al-Quds--and that's Jerusalem--from the hands 
     of the rapists--Israelis--and to cleanse Palestine from the 
     clutches of the occupation, deeming this an individual duty 
     for all Muslims.''

  More specifically, he ``called on all Muslims to wage jihad with 
their money and their selves to free al-Quds''--or Jerusalem--the same, 
exact language one finds in al Qaeda's tracts.

                              {time}  2010

  The article goes on that earlier this year the Middle East Research 
Institute translated a sermon of bodies in

[[Page 10878]]

which he called for ``gradually establishing a global Islamic caliphate 
leading to `mastership of the world.'''
  ``Mastership of the world'' is what's in quotes.
  It is interesting, because it hasn't been that long ago. This was 
posted by my friend Patrick Poole, July 5, 2012. It says, ``Rewind--
2010: Egypt's prez Morsi called for expulsion of U.S. ambassadors 
across Middle East.'' Patrick Poole says:

       While doing a bit of filing in the office yesterday, I came 
     across a September 2010 Reuters article of more recent 
     interest.
       You might recall that was the time when Terry Jones, in 
     Florida, was threatening to burn a Koran on the 9/11 
     anniversary and had the whole Muslim world in an uproar--
     before he had even committed the act (which happened several 
     months later).
       In the mere contemplation of such an action by Terry Jones, 
     the Muslim Brotherhood was calling on all Muslim countries to 
     expel all U.S. Ambassadors. And who was making this call?
       According to Reuters:
       Mohammad Mursi, spokesman for Egypt's influential Muslim 
     Brotherhood, said the organization was calling for pressure 
     on all Muslim governments to expel U.S. Ambassadors.

  Yes, this is what we want to encourage, this type of leader. We want 
to tell the world by this President's open arms at the White House--not 
with the ill treatment previously of Prime Minister Netanyahu--but with 
open arms, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood who never disclaimed the 
desire to make us subservient to shari'a law, bringing him to the White 
House.
  As some of us travel around and speak to different people around the 
world, those who are truly fighting for freedom--and not the freedom 
the Muslim Brotherhood talks about, where it is freedom only to worship 
Allah; freedom truly to make choices about who one worships or whether 
one worships at all. They say when the United States invites someone 
and shows hospitality to people in the world, the rest of the world 
gets the message that the conduct of those individuals they are 
inviting and embracing and having smiling pictures with, that their 
conduct is a good thing.
  When this country's leaders embrace leaders of other countries, it 
tells the world this is what we think in America is the way to act, the 
way to be, the thing to do. That it is very deflating. Having talked to 
Iranian refugees in northern Iraq, they just get devastated when they 
see an American leader being so chummy with people they know embrace 
terrorism, that have no problem with terrorist activities to promote 
Islam spreading around the world.
  This President should be far more careful about who he encourages and 
who he discourages, because the true friends of liberty around the 
world, who stood up to Syria's leader, they were not embraced by this 
President. There was no statement from this President of: Let's do for 
the protesters and the rebels in Syria what I demanded we did in Libya. 
There was nothing like that.
  We've sent Secretary of State Clinton over to the Middle East. There 
have been statements that we don't like what you're doing, but nothing 
like what this White House did when they cut the legs out from Mubarak 
who at least tried to keep the peace with Israel to some extent and 
what he did in actually providing bombs and air cover to take out 
Qadhafi in Libya.
  We knew at the time the Muslim Brotherhood will probably take over 
Egypt, that they have called us the great Satan. We knew in Libya that 
there were even al Qaeda who want to bring about this Nation's end 
violently, and yet this President embraced those al Qaeda rebels, along 
with the other rebels in Libya, dropped bombs, and provided air cover.
  None of that has been done for Syria. It's a little bit strange 
because much of the world considers Syria's leader to be a mere puppet 
of the Iranian terrorist leaders. Certainly Russia, who has shown great 
hostility to some of the things we deem to be appropriate liberty, they 
embrace the actions of the Syrian leader.
  Where was this President when there were true freedom seekers 
stepping up and being killed? Was he giving a pretty speech?
  Another article that was in The Blaze, July 8, says:

       The Jerusalem Post explains:
       Washington, long wary of Islamists and a former ally of 
     ousted President Hosni Mubarak, shifted policy last year to 
     open formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood, the group 
     behind Mursi's win.
       Mursi's success at the polls mirrors the rising influence 
     of Islamists in countries across the Middle East and North 
     Africa in the wake of revolts and protests against autocratic 
     rulers who have led the region for decades.

  But the Obama administration has invited Egypt's new Islamist leader, 
Mohammed Mursi, to visit the United States in September, according to 
an Egyptian official, clearly reflecting Washington's changing view of 
Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood.
  Here is another article, posted April 26 of this year, from The 
Blaze. It is entitled, ``Want to Know Just How Close the Muslim 
Brotherhood is to the Obama Administration?'' It says:

       On Wednesday evening, GBTV unveiled a powerful documentary, 
     ``Rumors of War III,'' exposing how radical Islamists, 
     including the Muslim Brotherhood, are infiltrating American 
     Government at its highest levels. Above is a video clip from 
     the program outlining some of the key players involved.

  It goes on:

       Arif Alikahn, Former Department of Homeland Security 
     Assistant Secretary for Policy Development: Now a 
     Distinguished Visiting Professor of DHS and Counterterrorism 
     at the National Defense University, Alikahn also served as 
     Deputy Mayor for Public Safety for the City of Los Angeles, 
     where he reportedly derailed the LAPD's efforts to monitor 
     the city's Muslim community--particularly its radical mosques 
     and madrassas where certain 9/11 hijackers were said to have 
     received support. He is affiliated with MPAC, which has 
     called the terrorist group Hezbollah a ``liberation 
     movement.''

  It goes on to establish some of the ties of this administration with 
members of the Muslim Brotherhood.
  It was intriguing to me, when I asked our own Secretary of Homeland 
Security, Janet Napolitano, how many members of the Muslim Brotherhood 
were on her countering violent terrorism--violent extremism--sorry. She 
can't use the word ``terrorism.'' She couldn't tell me whether 10 were 
Muslim Brotherhood or not. She didn't know.
  Some of these things for some of us bring back memories of 
occurrences back from the late seventies when our own President Jimmy 
Carter, who has to be encouraged by this President's administration--
because many people have said they thought he had the worst Presidency 
in history and did so much damage to international affairs--when you 
look at what this administration has done.

                              {time}  2020

  I mean, to the extent that an African from West Africa, elderly 
gentleman, but full of wisdom, wanted to meet me and visit when I was 
there a couple of years ago.
  He said, we were very excited that you elected a black man as your 
President, but we have seen America appear to grow weaker and weaker in 
the eyes of most people. He asked that I come back and convey--and I 
have on more than one occasion--that you must not allow the United 
States to grow weak. Those of us who are Christian in foreign countries 
rely on the United States' strength to keep us somewhat safe.
  If you let the world think that the United States is weak, or become 
weak, then many of us have no hope of being safe in this life. This 
country has to stand strong, and we have seen it grow weaker and weaker 
in the eyes of the world.
  There's an article that's reprinted July 9, today, in Human Events, 
which was originally by Robert Spencer back February 14 of this year. 
He said:

       Last week the Egyptian government announced that it intends 
     to put 19 Americans on trial for fomenting antigovernment 
     protests, a charge they deny. Protests from the Obama 
     administration have so far been futile, met with sneers of 
     contempt.
       If you're of a certain age, this should sound familiar. On 
     November 4, 1979, Iranian thugs stormed the U.S. Embassy in 
     Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage. Jimmy Carter's 
     government wrung its hands in futility for the next 14 
     months, until finally the Islamist Republic released the 
     hostages January 20, 1981, the day Ronald Reagan took office 
     as President of the United States.

[[Page 10879]]

       The bitter irony in all that was that Carter had betrayed 
     the Shah of Iran, a longtime U.S. ally, and thereby paved the 
     way for the ascent to power of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the 
     Iranian mullahcracy that has ruled Iran ever since. Rather 
     than feel gratitude toward Carter, however, Khomeini viewed 
     his abandonment of the Shah as a sign of weakness and pressed 
     forward with his jihad against the Great Satan.
       Iran has been hostile towards the United States since then, 
     including gleeful predictions of our Nation's imminent 
     demise. Just days ago, Iran's Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah 
     Khamenei, declared to an enthusiastic Tehran crowd, that ``in 
     light of the realization of the divine promise by almighty 
     God, the Zionists and the Great Satan (America) will soon be 
     defeated. Allah's promises will be delivered, and Islam will 
     be victorious.''

  The original Ayatollah Khomeini, not Khamenei, was said by Jimmy 
Carter to be a man, a fellow man of faith. Well, he has a different 
kind of faith, and we have soldiers still dying today because the 
United States of America allowed some Iranian thugs, terrorists, to 
commit an act of war by attacking an American embassy, taking Americans 
hostage, and did nothing to defend our territory.
  I was at Fort Benning at the time. We were put on alert. Nobody 
wanted to go to Iran, but everybody expected, surely we will do 
something to show these Islamist jihadists, these thugs, that you 
cannot commit an act of war against the United States and not pay a 
price. Because as the United States Government, we have a duty to 
provide for the common defense. We have a duty to protect American 
property.
  When American property is attacked, and under everybody's 
interpretation of international, an embassy is that country's own 
property, we let it go without anything but weak-kneed responses, and 
we are paying the price today. But we see this President who thinks a 
wonderful speech--and he's good at them, he reads them so well and 
throwing in constant apologies to people who want to destroy us and see 
us wiped off the map--will somehow engender love and devotion from 
people who want to destroy us.
  It doesn't work that way internationally. We have a duty to protect 
this Constitution, and we are not doing so in embracing enemies of this 
country who still have not disclaimed the pledge, the effort to see 
this country overthrown.
  There was a time when Presidents would view people who have made such 
claims and pledges or been part of terrorist organizations, we would 
not embrace such individuals, because we know the harm it does to our 
allies.
  One article from a guy named Michael D. Evans says:

       Carter viewed Khomeini as a religious holy man in a 
     grassroots revolution, rather than a founding father of 
     modern terrorism who introduced the Islamofascist ideology we 
     are fighting today in the world war on terrorism.
       As Henry Kissinger said, ``Carter has managed the 
     extraordinary feat of having, at one and the same time, the 
     worst relations with our allies, the worst relations with our 
     adversaries, and the most serious upheavals in the developing 
     world since the end of the Second World War.''
  That was then, and now we have another President doing the very same 
thing.
  There was an article from The New York Times back in June of 2001:

       Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel will meet with 
     President Bush at the White House next week, the second time 
     the two have held face-to-face discussions since Mr. Sharon's 
     election.
       In contrast, Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, has not 
     been invited to Washington by the Bush administration, and 
     officials made clear today that they had no plans to do so in 
     the near future. So far the administration has kept Mr. 
     Arafat at arm's length, a stark difference from President 
     Clinton, who brought the Palestinian leader to the White 
     House more than any other foreign leader.

  Those messages are not missed by allies and enemies alike around the 
world.
  There is another article, this is from The New York Times, posted 
today:

       In his first major speech last month, Mohamed Morsi, the 
     new Egyptian president, pledged to seek the release of a 
     notorious Egyptian terrorist from a North Carolina prison. 
     Not long before that, a member of a designated terrorist 
     organization, Gamaa al-Islamiyya--who also happens to be a 
     recently elected member of the Egyptian Parliament--was 
     welcomed to Washington as part of an official delegation 
     sponsored by the State Department.

  ``Obama administration officials made no public comment on Mr. 
Morsi's promise and struggled to explain why the Egyptian Parliament 
member, Hani Nour Eldin, got a visa''--since after all he was a member 
of a designated terrorist organization. But he got not only a visa, he 
got entrance into our most secure administration dwellings.
  The article says that the administration cited privacy rules, 
``declining to say whether he had been granted a waiver from the ban on 
such visitors or whether his affiliation simply escaped notice.''

       Pressed by reporters after the visa quickly became a 
     congressional controversy, a State Department spokeswoman, 
     Victoria J. Nuland, said Mr. Eldin had been judged to pose no 
     threat to the United States.

                              {time}  2030

       ``It's a new day in Egypt,'' she added.
       ``It's a new day in a lot of countries across the Middle 
     East and North Africa.''

  And I might add, it was a new day in Iran when the Ayatollah Khomeini 
took over and President Carter welcomed him as a fellow man of faith.
  This article from the Times goes on:

       For the Obama administration, as it navigates the 
     tumultuous effects of the Arab spring, it's a complicated day 
     as well. Long-held assumptions about who is a friend of the 
     United States and who is not have been upset, leaving 
     Americans confused.

  Well, it's leaving not only Americans confused; it's leaving our 
allies confused. We have people around the world who have fought with 
us, they have fought for us, and this administration has turned its 
back on them. You can go to the country of Afghanistan and some 
terrible killings have once again occurred. We know that Pakistan, 
according to the people I've talked to traveling around Afghanistan, 
Pakistan is basically the biggest source of supplies, reinforcement, or 
help to the Taliban. And what do we do? We have our Secretary of State 
apologize to the country who kept our country's biggest enemy, the 
mastermind behind the killing of more Americans than any other attack 
in our history on our soil, and they protected him. And they kept him 
protected. And we are supposed to apologize to Pakistan? Well, this 
administration did.
  And when our soldiers, our military suffered attacks from a certain 
area there adjoining Pakistan, and apparently in Pakistan, they finally 
responded to protect themselves, and we have to apologize for people 
dying who were in the area where attacks were emanating against our own 
soldiers. We have to apologize to a country who is supplying and 
funding the Taliban that's killing American soldiers.
  Yeah, it's confusing to Americans and it's confusing to our allies. 
And that's why, when a handful of us were in Afghanistan in April, we 
were a little surprised that this administration did not want us to 
meet with our Northern Alliance friends, among them General Dostum. 
Instead, this administration prefers to address them as war criminals. 
Yeah, they fight tough. They defeated the Taliban. They fight like the 
Taliban. And they have no interest in losing because they know it means 
they lose their lives, they lose their homes, they lose their country. 
So they fight viciously.
  And we were able to take out the Taliban initially with a few hundred 
soldiers. Less than 500 Americans. We had intelligence. We had special 
ops. We provided air cover, provided some weapons. And the Taliban was 
routed. We had a hundred thousand or so military into Afghanistan. 
We've become occupiers. Occupiers don't do well in that part of the 
world. Yet this administration continually throws our allies under the 
bus, thinking if we just embrace our enemies, if we make a great 
speech, maybe if I read from the teleprompters effectively enough, then 
they'll see how wonderful I am and America is and they'll come fall and 
embrace us and just want to provide us nothing but love and affection.
  It's an unrealistic view of the world. And yes, I'm a Christian and I 
believe everyone should be free to worship or not worship as they 
please. But that is not the case in Egypt right now. It's not the case 
in Libya right now. It's not the case in Afghanistan right now. It's 
not the case anywhere in any country where sharia is the law. We want

[[Page 10880]]

Muslims, we want atheists to be free to worship, not worship. This is 
America. But any group, whether atheists or any other religion in the 
world that attempts to force us to comply with their religious laws, 
should not be tolerated.
  Some say you've got a bunch of xenophobes and Islamaphobes. It's 
interesting that the term Islamaphobe basically was generated by the 
Organization of Islamic Council, the OIC, that has 50 States--no, wait. 
They've got 57 States and we've got 50; or we've got 57 and they've got 
50. I get confused. Somebody on CNN said, Well, the only reason the 
President said the U.S. had 57 States is he was tired. So maybe I'm 
just tired. I can't remember who has 57, who has 50. Some people don't 
understand sarcasm either.
  But the OIC promulgated that term and they've given millions and 
millions and millions of dollars to universities in America, including 
some Ivy League schools. They're not Islamaphobes. They have sold their 
soul for money. Sure, if you will give us millions, you bet you--
hundreds of thousands even--we'll teach a course on Islamaphobia. We'll 
denigrate other religions. We'll denigrate the Founders. We'll 
denigrate those who would lay down their lives for this country's 
freedom, and we'll call them Islamaphobes.
  Well, there's no Islamaphobia here. That's why I told the security 
detail at the American Embassy in Afghanistan's capital, when I was 
told I was not going to be able to go meet our allies at the Massoud 
residence, our friend Massoud knows something about sacrifice. His 
brother possibly could have united Afghanistan, but was assassinated a 
day or so before 9/11 because the Taliban knew that he might be able to 
unite the country. And if the United States figured out this is where 
the attack emanated, training emanated from, then they may come. So 
they assassinated my friend's brother.
  General Dostum, who led that gallant charge uphill against the 
Taliban in the face of RPGs and bullets flying, offered to take me on 
horseback to reenact that internationally famous battle uphill against 
all odds. What courage on our behalf and on behalf of people who want 
freedom in Afghanistan. I was certainly willing--I have grown up riding 
horses--until the interpreter told me, You do understand, they don't 
have leather saddles. They're all wood. That kind of changed my desire 
to do that.
  But General Dostum, Massoud, these great Northern Alliance leaders 
that fought for us, who lost friends and family fighting with us and 
for us, have been thrown under the bus. But as I told the head of the 
security detail there, I was going to meet our friends at the Massoud 
residence. And after I was told we couldn't go, I let them know that I 
had talked to my friend Mr. Massoud and that they were sending secured 
vehicles to pick me up and at least two or three other Members of 
Congress that would go. And when I was told that would not be secure, 
we couldn't do that, I made clear that they would have to take me down 
before I got to the gate of the Embassy compound, because I was going, 
and that I would do that after our next meeting with our soldiers--
American soldiers. After the meeting, I was told, We've arranged 
security for you to go to the meeting so you don't have to ride with 
the Massoud security folks.

                              {time}  2040

  We had a good meeting. It was great to see them. They have trouble 
understanding why this administration has forsaken them, our allies. I 
don't hear anybody here calling this administration Islamophobes 
because they have thrown our Muslim friends under the bus. But they are 
the enemy of our enemy, the Taliban. And this administration, this 
President, has made clear to this corrupt regime over there that, look, 
we're going to be out on this day certain; you'll be on your own for 
the military.
  Well, now, they're negotiating some kind of deal where we may provide 
some help. But Karzai, for all the things he is, he is not totally 
stupid. He is not a stupid man. And he knows if all our soldiers are 
gone, and with all the support that Pakistan has given the Taliban, 
then the Taliban is going to be there. They will be as vicious as they 
have in the past, and he'd better make some peace with the Taliban. 
That's why they've been allowed such freedom in the Afghan capital to 
the point that the Taliban leader would tell and proclaim, yes, we all 
can see because the U.S., because the Obama administration is begging 
them to come negotiate and we'll buy them things, we'll release their 
thugs that have killed Americans, killed innocents, but we'll release 
them, we'll do whatever. You just come talk to us.
  It's obvious to the world that we've lost. This administration is 
sending dangerous signals to our allies that you cannot trust this 
country as an ally of this country. You'd better watch your back. So 
when this administration says, we've got your back, you better be 
wearing something that will stop a knife because it could be 
forthcoming. As President Mubarak found, as the Northern Alliance 
found, as freedom lovers in Iran have found, as freedom desirers at 
Camp Ashraf have found, and as some of our allies in Israel have found, 
this administration is the first American administration to vote with 
Israel's enemies a couple of years ago when we voted with Israel's 
enemies to require them to disclose their weaponry.
  So it's confusing to people around the world. Should we take a chance 
on being a friend to America because a year or two later they may 
embrace our enemies and throw us under the bus?
  I do believe in the teachings of Jesus. I do believe in the teachings 
and have been there where they say it's pretty certain this is where 
Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount and told us who it was who was 
blessed. So some say, well, shouldn't our government turn the other 
cheek? Blessed are those who mourn. Shouldn't we be the peacemakers? 
Yes, we should be the peacemakers. But as a government, we have a 
different obligation. Ours is to protect our people. We are to protect 
those who live in America, who have trusted us to be their public 
servants so that they can live out the beatitudes if they choose, so 
that they can live out and follow the teachings of whatever religious 
leader they choose. But they can't do that unless we keep them safe.
  I'm reading a book that I started yesterday called ``The Harbinger.'' 
It indicates God withdrew His hand from our protection on 9/11. There 
are interesting things in that book. It's time we look at the signs and 
we understand from world history that you don't turn on your allies and 
embrace your enemies and expect to save your country. You convince 
others who might be tempted to be your allies not to be. You teach your 
enemies that you are weak in the same way individuals on a school 
playground do not convince a bully that they are strong when they start 
giving gifts to the bully and try to buy the bully's kindness and 
respect because what it buys is not respect, it is contempt. And that 
is the way this country is now viewed around the world.
  If you are evil in the world, just as Romans 13 points out, if you do 
evil, you should be afraid because this government does not have the 
sword in vain. We owe a duty to freedom-loving people around the world 
not to become weak but to protect freedom here so others can enjoy 
freedom other places knowing that the United States of America does not 
embrace and fall in love with terrorists or terrorist organizations or 
leaders of terrorist groups. We fight them, and we embrace those who 
love peace, not terrorism; and we make the world and this country safer 
in so doing.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I will include in the Record a letter. This is Act 
for America. I brought this up before, but because we have rules that 
don't allow things that include too many pages, we had to revisit the 
issue because there are so many thousands and thousands of signatures. 
It can be found at this Web site for Act for America. This is a 
petition and a letter sent to the Honorable Joseph Lieberman, the 
Honorable Patrick Leahy, the Honorable Dianne Feinstein, the Honorable 
Peter King, the Honorable Lamar Smith, and the Honorable Mike Rogers. 
It's signed online by thousands and thousands of

[[Page 10881]]

verified signatures, and those can be found from Act for America, 
Pensacola, Florida.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                                             ACT! for America,

                                      Pensacola, FL, July 9, 2012.
     Hon. Louie Gohmert,
     Rayburn House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Gohmert: Attached, please find an ACT! for 
     America Open Letter to targeted members of the U.S. Congress. 
     The letter has been signed by over 21,000 Americans--all of 
     whom are very concerned with ongoing actions by the FBI 
     related to the language of the agency's counterterrorism 
     training materials.
       ACT! for America shares the concerns of some Members of 
     Congress, yourself included, that the ongoing purge of 
     counterterrorism training materials used by the FBI as well 
     as state and local law enforcement is a danger to our nation. 
     Further, we see these actions as a continuation of concerted 
     efforts to manipulate, if not altogether eliminate, a clear 
     definition of the threat that radical Islam poses to our 
     nation.
       We hope this letter will serve as a useful token of the 
     concern the American people have for this issue as well. It 
     also may be found on our website: http://www.act
     foramerica.com/index.php/fbi-petition.
       Thank you very much for all of your efforts in the United 
     States Congress. The 240,000 members of ACT! for America 
     stand with you every step of the way.
           With warm regards,

                                                 Lisa Piraneo,

                                 Director of Government Relations,
                                                 ACT! for America.
       Enclosure.


                                             ACT! for America,

                                                    Pensacola, FL.


     PLEASE PUT AN IMMEDIATE STOP TO PLANNED CHANGES IN THE FBI'S 
                   COUNTERTERRORISM TRAINING POLICIES

     Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman,
     Chair, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 
         Committee.
     Hon. Patrick Leahy,
     Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee.
     Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
     Chair, Senate Select Intelligence Committee.
     Hon. Peter King,
     Chair, House Homeland Security Committee.
     Hon. Lamar Smith,
     Chair, House Judiciary Committee.
     Hon. Mike Rogers,
     Chair, House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee.
       Dear Chairmen Lieberman, King, Leahy, Smith, Feinstein and 
     Rogers: We write to you today in strong opposition to 
     proposed changes to FBI counterterrorism training materials.
       We share the concern of many sitting Members of Congress 
     that the ongoing purge of counterterrorism training materials 
     used by the FBI and state and local law enforcement puts our 
     nation at great peril. It is critically important to the 
     safety of our nation and its citizens that our law 
     enforcement officials are permitted to accurately define the 
     threat, and based on that definition, put in place sound 
     policies to protect our nation and its citizens. Law 
     enforcement officials are the front line of counterterrorism, 
     and they must have accurate training materials that cannot be 
     modified at the whim of one or two Members of Congress, or 
     outside consultants whose identities are kept secret from 
     congressional oversight.
       Whitewashing of law enforcement counterterrorism materials 
     appears to be an informal implementation of U.N. Resolution 
     16/18 (the ``The Istanbul Process''). This resolution 
     includes language that seeks to bypass the U.S. Constitution 
     by laying the groundwork for criminalizing any action or 
     speech against a religion, using protection against 
     ``incitement to violence'' as the rationale. The State 
     Department has vowed to aid the Istanbul Process, and this is 
     completely unacceptable. This resolution and the policies it 
     supports are completely prohibited by the First Amendment to 
     the U.S. Constitution and must be rejected by the United 
     States. Political correctness must not trump constitutional 
     rights, nor hamper our country's ability to protect itself by 
     muzzling law enforcement.
       We strongly encourage you to hold hearings on this issue 
     and, further, to do all that you can to put an immediate halt 
     to any changes in law enforcement counterterrorism policies 
     before they have been fully vetted through congressional 
     oversight. Your committees share jurisdiction over these 
     matters.
       Please know that the American public is becoming more 
     educated about the threats posed to our nation by those who 
     support and/or perform acts of terrorism in the name of 
     political/radical Islam. We are looking to our elected 
     officials to enact sound policies that will protect us, as 
     they swore to do when they took their oaths of office.
           Sincerely,
       This petition signed by 21,195 verified signators. For a 
     full list of signators please send your request to: ACT! For 
     America, PO Box 12765, Pensacola, FL 32591.

                          ____________________