[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3903-3905]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1330
                      NUCLEAR AGREEMENT WITH IRAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Gohmert) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, the story out in a number of media, like 
this from Breitbart, ``First Details of Iran Deal: Allows 6,000 
Centrifuges, Rolls Back the U.N. Arms Embargo.'' That story talks about 
in order to entice Iran to cut back to 6,000 or 6,500 centrifuges, 
elements of the U.N. arms embargo against Iran could be rolled back.
  I think it is important to recall, it hasn't been that long ago that 
a principal cornerstone of the discussions between the Obama 
administration and the--I have to be careful of the words I use here on 
the House floor--America-killing Iran administration was going to 
require them to dismantle their efforts toward nuclear production, and 
now they are floating a draft that is going to allow them to have 
thousands of centrifuges.
  Now, I have been advised by people at the IAEA in Vienna that, 
actually, if they just have 3,000 centrifuges, with all of the uranium 
that has been enriched to 5 percent, they only need 3,000 to take it up 
to 90 percent. Once you are at 5 percent, it seems like it would be a 
long way to get to 90, but actually it is just a matter of weeks.
  You could do it easily in a facility that would be easy to hide, 
because you could take those 3,000 in a facility 30 meters by 70 meters 
and you could enrich from 5 to 90 percent at weapons grade uranium, 
have the nukes that at least at one time Ayatollah Khamenei has 
indicated--I understand still believes--that they can hasten the return 
of the 12th imam, the Mahdi, to rule over this world caliphate, and 
they can do so because they believe the prophecy is that he will 
arise--the 12th imam, as the Mahdi, the head of the caliphate, this 
world caliphate, he will arise out of chaos, and they believe that 
could be nuclear chaos.
  So, in effect, if this administration agrees to allow even 1,500 
centrifuges to continue to spin in Iran, he is hastening the demise of 
millions of people, ultimately. A new Holocaust. Now, it is one thing 
when leaders in the United States could say, ``Gee, we didn't know that 
millions of Jews were being killed by Hitler; gee, we just didn't 
know,'' but there came a point where it became very clear, and Hitler 
and his subordinates really tried to hide what they were doing.
  Iran has made no bones about what they want to do. They want to wipe 
Israel off the map. First of all, they are never going to eliminate all 
of the Jews in the world; it will not happen. As God is my witness, 
that will not happen. What will happen, as anybody, including this 
administration, if they are intent on going there, to allow Iran to 
continue to move toward nuclear weapons under this so-called nuclear 
agreement, they move there, it will cause judgment to come down on our 
country for allowing something so horrific to become possible when we 
had the means to stop it.
  This is no time for anyone who is a civilized individual, who 
believes in the rights of men, the rights of women, the rights of 
children, to be cutting a deal with these cutthroats in Iran. Nobody 
seems to want to talk about it, but Iran has drug this thing out for 
over a year.
  Perhaps Valerie Jarrett was working a deal even longer than that. 
There were reports that she was negotiating with them early on, trying 
to see if something could be done. Whether that is true or not, clearly 
what Iran has done is drug out the talks, continued to increase the 
number of centrifuges it has spinning, continued to move toward the 
ability to have a tremendous amount of 5 percent enrichment so that it 
very quickly can move to 90 percent and develop the nukes.
  They would likely develop a number of them at the same time, not just 
do one. They would do a number and then spread them out so that, once 
they move into nuclear mode, they have several. You try to take them 
out at that point; you are going to find one or more of them in cities 
that you care about. So we should never allow that to even become 
possible.
  When I see this deal, I see all these articles about it, then I see 
this article ``Obama Planning Drastic Shake-Up in Policy Toward 
Israel.'' So because the people of Israel, in their election, made 
clear, ``We would prefer not to be wiped out by Iran, and we can tell 
that the deal that the Obama administration is cutting is bad for 
Israel and puts us at extreme risk,'' they gave more seats than were 
expected to the Likud Party, Netanyahu's party.
  What is the response of the Obama administration after they threw 
everything they possibly could, threw temper tantrums about Prime 
Minister Netanyahu speaking from right here just to tell us his 
perspective on the Iranian deal because his country is most at risk? 
Those that refused to understand--it isn't just Israel at risk--may pay 
at the cost of thousands or millions of lives. These people have no 
respect for the lives of people who are not radical Islamists, as they 
are.
  So you might think: Oh, gee, maybe the Obama administration learned a 
lesson; let's don't try to interfere in the election process in a 
foreign country. It does make you wonder, you know, there were all 
those rumors about since the Obama money was never audited in his 
original campaign in 2008 and there were massive numbers of $50 
contributions with credit cards, where did those come from? Were any of 
those foreign?
  We have seen allegations about money coming in to Hillary Clinton's 
campaign from foreigners. We know in Bill Clinton's campaign they got 
caught redhanded with money from monks that was given to Vice President 
Al Gore, but, you know, foreigners are not supposed to be able to 
influence our elections. It appears that potentially they have.
  If that were true--don't know for certain because there wasn't an 
audit done, but maybe that would help explain why this administration 
is so quick to get involved in the election process in Israel to try to 
destroy Netanyahu, who was more concerned with the preservation of the 
nation of Israel than he was in getting another Nobel Peace Prize for 
this administration.
  But this, dated today, by Melanie Batley says:

       The White House on Wednesday suggested it could reverse its 
     decades-old policy of using its veto in the United Nations 
     Security Council to protect Israel. It could refuse to veto 
     resolutions related to the Palestinians or introduce a 
     measure of its own, The Wall Street Journal reported.
       The U.S. could also lend its support to a two-state 
     solution based on Israel's 1967 borders, a senior White House 
     official told The New York Times: ``We're currently 
     evaluating our approach,'' State Department spokeswoman Jen 
     Psaki said, according to the Journal. ``We're not going to 
     prejudge

[[Page 3904]]

     what we would do if there was a U.N. action.''

  She should have said ``if there were,'' but she said ``if there 
was.''
  The article also says:

       The Obama administration in the past has shielded Israel at 
     the Security Council, using a veto to strike down a 
     resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity in 
     Palestinian territory.
       Now, Obama officials may decide to allow Israel to be 
     exposed to more international pressure in an attempt to force 
     them back into negotiating.

  This is what I would call a deal to hasten the attempted demise of 
Israel.
  It is interesting, though, ``We're currently evaluating our 
approach,'' the State Department said, because we were told by a Muslim 
Brothers publication in December of 2012 that--yes, I believe it was 
2012. It was before the fall of Muslim Brother Morsi as President of 
Egypt, but it was a Muslim Brothers-approved publication in Egypt that 
bragged about the six top advisers in the Obama administration who they 
bragged were Muslim Brothers.
  Now, some in the media don't want to do anything but vilify me for 
pointing out what the Muslim Brothers have pointed out, but for a 
number of years I tried to advise the Homeland Security Department that 
you have elevated a man to the top advisory council, given him a secret 
security clearance, allowed him to access documents, which I was told 
by people, I believe, including the director of DPS in Texas, that we 
know that this man downloaded two documents. We know he downloaded them 
with his personal computer at his home, and then the report from 
Patrick Poole, the reporter, that he had direct indication from a 
national media outlet that Mr. Elibiary had shopped those documents to 
this national media outlet, who happened to refuse.
  I asked Secretary Napolitano about it. She said she knew nothing 
about it. That was interesting, because her chief told the director of 
Texas Department of Public Safety the night before, who advised me the 
night before, that she had been totally briefed on what Elibiary had 
done. When I brought it up the next day, either she lied in front of 
our committee or her close staff member lied to the Department of 
Public Safety director in Texas the night before.
  But we do know this. Later when I again asked her about it and if it 
had been investigated, she said that DHS had looked into it and there 
was nothing to it. Yet, when there was a FOIA request for the documents 
pertaining to the investigation, there were no documents that supported 
that there ever was an investigation. So either, again, the Department 
of Homeland Security Secretary lied, committed a crime, or DHS lied and 
there were documents about that investigation.
  In any event, last September, the Homeland Security Department, after 
years of being warned about this person they kept elevating, after one 
of the ISIS videos hit television and showed the Islamic State cutting 
off the head of an American, this top adviser to our Homeland Security 
Department tweeted out, basically, the caliphate's inevitable; people 
just need to get used to the idea. That was the basis of it. So at 
Homeland Security, they allowed him to go ahead and not be renewed as a 
top adviser to Homeland Security.
  We also know that Imam Magid, who had been head of the Islamic 
Society of North America, which Islamic Society of North America was 
aimed as a co-conspirator in the largest prosecution for supporting 
terrorism in the history of the United States in going after the Holy 
Land Foundation in Dallas, Texas, Federal Court. The Islamic Society of 
North America was named as a co-conspirator, as was the Council of 
American Islamic Relations, CAIR.

                              {time}  1345

  Although, we saw a story last year where they were thinking about 
changing their name to--I forget what the words were--but instead of 
CAIR, it would be WTF. I guess they thought better of having WTF be 
their symbolic letters representing who they are.
  In any event, CAIR, ISNA, they were named coconspirators in the Holy 
Land Foundation trial. When an effort was made to remove their names 
from being listed as coconspirators, the judge in the Federal court 
there in Dallas reviewed the evidence and said, No, there is evidence 
that supports having their names as coconspirators.
  They appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for the United 
States and all those judges looked at it and said, No, there is plenty 
of evidence here to support that these groups are coconspirators with 
the Holy Land Foundation--whose principals were convicted of supporting 
terrorism and sent to prison.
  This administration gets sworn in within 2 months of the conviction, 
and instead of being careful about these groups that U.S. Federal 
courts had said we had plenty of evidence to show that they support 
terrorism, this administration neglected--refused--to consider that 
because they thought they knew better.
  They brought the leaders of CAIR and ISNA into the realm of their 
close advisers; so is it any mystery that when Prime Minister Netanyahu 
was coming to Washington in May of 2011, the President sought advice--
got advice--from the leader of this named coconspirator supporting 
terrorism, Imam Magid?
  When the President gave this speech in the State Department itself, 
Imam Magid was there. This administration had obviously given him 
credentials to allow him not only in the White House, but in the inner 
sanctum of the State Department.
  When I read, ``We are currently evaluating our approach,'' from the 
State Department, I can't help but wonder: Have you got Imam Magid in 
there--which this Egyptian Muslim Brother-approved article said was a 
Muslim Brother, a top adviser--have you got him in there helping advise 
you on how to go after Netanyahu and how to put Israel more at risk 
than you already have?
  ``We are evaluating our approach'' scares me--should scare others--
when you know the kind of people that are giving this administration 
advice.
  This article says:

       The Obama administration in the past has shielded Israel at 
     the Security Council, using a veto to strike down a 
     resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity in 
     Palestinian territory. Now, Obama officials may decide to 
     allow Israel to be exposed to more international pressure in 
     an attempt to force them back into negotiating a peace deal.

  Well, Israel has eyes wide open as Iran continues to spin centrifuges 
and enrich uranium. They understand that their very existence is at 
risk; yet we have people here in Washington--this administration--that 
apparently are hearing from people saying, Oh, no, it's no problem. 
Israel is the real problem here.
  Never mind the people that are advising this administration are more 
upset with Israel wanting to continue to exist than they are with Iran 
for wanting to wipe out Israel and the United States.
  This should scare people in the United States because, as Prime 
Minister Netanyahu pointed out--though he didn't have to--he cares 
about the United States. He was educated here. He would like to see us 
continue to exist and be friends with Israel.
  He pointed out, Look, they are developing intercontinental ballistic 
missiles. Those are not to hit us in Israel, he says, they are coming 
after us, but they really don't even need intercontinental ballistic 
missiles.
  They can put them on a cargo ship and bring them right into our 
ports, bring them right up the Potomac River, into the Houston Ship 
Channel, into New Orleans. In between New Orleans and Houston, they can 
wipe out 70 percent of our refined gasoline, so we could be in a world 
of hurt in a real hurry.
  The President's job is to help provide for the common defense, and it 
seems that his initiative is more to be opposed to anything Israel 
knows in its collective heart will keep them protected.
  Unfortunately, that is not all the news. We look here and find this 
article from Newsmax:

       Islamic State jihadists may have committed genocide in 
     trying to wipe out the

[[Page 3905]]

     Yazidi minority in Iraq, the U.N. said Thursday in a report 
     laying out a litany of atrocities. The Islamic State ``may 
     have committed all three of the most serious international 
     crimes--namely, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and 
     genocide,'' the United Nations human rights office said in a 
     statement.
       The agency published a horrifying report detailing 
     killings, torture, rape, sexual slavery, and the use of child 
     soldiers by the extremists. All of these crimes, it said, 
     were violations of international human rights and 
     humanitarian law, and some may amount to ``crimes against 
     humanity'' and ``war crimes.''

  Further down, it says:

       In numerous Yazidi villages, men and boys over the age of 
     14 were rounded up and shot, while the women and girls were 
     abducted as the ``spoils of war.'' The report, which was 
     ordered by the U.N. Human Rights Council last September, 
     following a request from the Iraqi Government, pointed out 
     that some villages ``were entirely emptied of their Yazidi 
     population.''
       Many Yazidi women and girls were sold into sexual slavery 
     or handed over to Islamic State members as ``gifts,'' the 
     report said, adding that witnesses had described hearing 
     girls as young as 6 screaming for help as they were raped in 
     a house used by Islamic State fighters.
       A pregnant 19-year-old had told the investigators she had 
     been repeatedly raped by a Islamic State ``doctor'' over a 
     period of 2\1/2\ months and that he deliberately sat on her 
     stomach, saying, ``This baby should die because it is an 
     infidel. I can make a Muslim baby.''

  We had the report in the last few weeks from a Catholic source in 
Nigeria where they have begged the United States for any help that it 
will give to try to stop Boko Haram and their efforts to wipe out 
Christians in Nigeria.
  This source indicated that they had heard from the United States--
from the Obama administration--that the Obama administration will only 
help them against Boko Haram if Nigeria will change its laws to allow 
same-sex marriage.
  Well, apparently, once this administration got through ObamaCare, it 
promised the Catholic leaders, Christian leaders: Hey, we will never, 
ever refuse to allow you to practice your religious beliefs.
  Well, that turned out to be a lie because, of course, they went after 
Catholic nuns, they went after the Catholic Church--well, at least 
those who actually practice what they hear preached in the Catholic 
Church--and any other Christian who believes that abortion is 
religiously wrong.
  I guess after the administration broke its promise and went after and 
used the full force of the government to prevent people from practicing 
their religious beliefs and being able to conform their conduct to 
their religious beliefs, it was a no-brainer that they would then try 
to impose their religious beliefs--or lack thereof--upon countries like 
Nigeria or others in Africa or around the world.
  There will be a price for the United States as a country to pay when 
we know about Jews being wiped out, when we know about Christians being 
wiped out, and God has blessed us with the ability to protect ourselves 
and to stop such genocide; not only do we do nothing to stop it, we 
demand that they abandon their Christian beliefs before we will offer 
any help.
  There will be a price to pay for the United States of America for 
being so callous as Christians and Jews around the world are suffering 
in numbers like never before.
  I applaud my friend Brad Sherman. This article from Pam Key today 
quotes Sherman as saying:

       I fear that you have misled this committee in telling us 
     that once Iran has the rights of a nonnuclear state subject 
     to additional protocol, that you'll be able to stop sneak-
     out, because you've said first that, well, they can't develop 
     a nuclear weapon because that would be illegal. That's a 
     preposterous argument. Obviously, they're willing to break 
     the law.

  My friend Mr. Sherman and I disagree on so much, but I know him to be 
an honorable man, and he understands Iran doesn't care about breaking 
deals. Any deal with Iran is like a deal with Hitler. The Soviet Union 
thought they could cut a deal with Hitler. The thing that their leaders 
were most mad about was that Hitler reached the agreement before they 
did because they had intentions, apparently, of breaching it.
  We are somewhere between Neville Chamberlain and Stalin in trying to 
reach a deal with a modern-day Hitler, except Hitler didn't have some 
crazy religious idea that he should wipe out everybody in the world 
that didn't have the exact same religious beliefs that he did.
  Look, we are on the side of right. President al-Sisi in Egypt is on 
the side of right. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, all over the Middle East, 
they are becoming afraid because this administration is on the verge of 
cutting a deal that will allow Iran to continue moving forward to not 
just one nuke, but many nukes, and a breakout could be a matter of 
weeks.
  I know people are talking about it could be years, but when you hear 
from people that know that you could have a facility 30 meters by 70 
meters and that you could sneak that 5 percent into a secret facility 
without people knowing and you could enrich it to 90 and have nuclear 
weapons, we ought to take notice.
  We have been blessed with much, and to whom much is given, of them 
much is required. The world deserves better with what we have been 
blessed with in the way of power, and they deserve to have us stand up 
against Iran. It is time for us to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________