[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 327-329]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     ISRAEL AND THE UNITED NATIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2017, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Gohmert) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, today we took up what was intended to be a 
very noble action on H. Res. 11 to rein in the out-of-control and 
outrageous actions of so many despots that occupy positions of 
authority in the United Nations. The United Nations, whether you go 
back to Libya being in charge of human rights, you have U.N. troops 
molesting so many females. There are all kinds of problems that have 
been wrought, and yet the U.N. has the gall to continually show how 
bigoted it is and how anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli that it is.
  It is easy to find, if anyone bothers to check, that the United 
Nations never asked once for any other country to pony up land, much 
less demand that other countries like Jordan, who is a good friend of 
the United States, but the U.N. never said: Look, you are occupying 
this land that they call Palestine, so you have to give it up. They 
never did until it was controlled by the Israeli people, thus making 
clear this is really a bigoted move by the U.N. to constantly slander 
and slam the nation of Israel.
  Also, if one wants to conduct another test to check to see how 
bigoted, if it is, the U.N. is, you could check on the condemnations by 
the U.N. for activities of Israel. Compare the facts of those 
activities and self-defense efforts by Israel and compare them to acts 
of other nations--the genocide, for example, that even Secretary Kerry, 
as tough as it was for him to finally admit that there was a genocide 
of Christians going on in the Middle East.
  Is there any outrage by the U.N.? No. In fact, the U.N. head of the 
refugees who is now the U.N. General Secretary made clear about over a 
year and a half ago or so that the reason that they weren't helping 
Christians to the extent that they were helping Muslim refugees is 
because of the historic importance Christians have in staying where 
they were--that means where they are being murdered, where they are 
having their throats slashed, being crucified, tortured, raped, 
incinerated. The U.N. General Secretary, when he was in charge of the 
refugee program, thought it was very important to leave Christians in 
the Middle East so they can be murdered in some of the most heinous and 
egregious fashions imaginable.
  So it was just and proper, to borrow from history, that we condemn 
the United Nations Resolution 2334 as being an obstacle to peace in 
Israel. Palestinians have made clear they don't want peace with Israel. 
They want it eliminated from the map. They name holidays, squares, and 
all kinds of things for people who go out and kill innocent Jewish 
children and others just for being Jewish. They reward the families of 
those who go and blow themselves up, killing, in atrocious fashions, 
innocent Israeli people. The United Nations turns a blind eye to it 
since the U.N. has become so racist, so bigoted, and so anti-Israel, 
the most antiterrorist country in all of the Middle East, including 
north Africa--although Egypt is of great help in that regard these 
days, and there are those in Libya who would like to. But after 
President Obama helped turn Libya into absolute anarchy and chaos, then 
Egypt is having their problems even coming from Libya.
  What has the U.N. had to say about all that? Not really anything 
because if the Muslim Brotherhood supports it, so does, basically, the 
U.N., and far too often so has the Obama administration.
  That is why, I guess, Israel got the lecture from Secretary John 
Kerry. Secretary Kerry, even in the days when

[[Page 328]]

he talked about the heinous acts of Genghis Khan, never bothered to 
mention the plight of the poor Palestinians before 1967 when they were 
under control of the most non-Israeli people you could imagine. There 
has been no discussion about that, only leveling really bigoted 
allegations at Israel.
  So we have H. Res. 11 today, and I was thrilled because it meant that 
I was going to be able to come to the floor and vote to condemn the 
U.N. passage of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334.
  Unfortunately, as some of my friends here in Congress have pointed 
out, I am a bit anal at times. I actually want to read the things that 
we are going to vote on. So I got my copy of H. Res. 11, immediately 
noting that, in the very first whereas, it says the United States has 
long supported a two-state solution. It does say ``sustainable two-
state solution.'' It says: ``Whereas since 1993, the United States has 
facilitated direct, bilateral negotiations between both parties toward 
achieving a two-state solution. . . .''
  Well, it is the truth that President Clinton twisted the arm of the 
Israeli Prime Minister and convinced him to basically give Arafat 
almost everything he wanted. Now, if you believe what Scripture says 
about Moses going and pleading to Pharaoh to let the Jewish people, the 
children of Israel, go, we are told that God hardens Pharaoh's heart so 
that He could make a big demonstration of His power and glory down the 
road. Although there was suffering that came--great suffering--
ultimately, incredible miracles were performed as a result of his 
hardened heart.
  I think it is likely that when Arafat got everything he wanted--
almost everything he wanted--in the offer from Israel, I thank God that 
Arafat turned him down. For anybody that has been in the military and 
goes to Israel, you can see readily, if Arafat had accepted what the 
Prime Minister of Israel had been willing, finally, to offer, it would 
have virtually made Israel indefensible unless they were using nuclear 
weapons or the threat of nuclear weapons.
  Israel needs to be able to defend itself. King David was ruling from 
Hebron in the year around 1020 B.C. to around 1012 B.C. Then he moved, 
and he was ruling over Israel. What is now called the West Bank was 
actually called Israel--I mean, it was part of the nation of Israel. 
Solomon had control, but he did so from the City of David because that 
is where, up to Jerusalem, that David had moved the capital from 
Hebron, which is also where Abraham and Sarah are buried.
  I have also visited the tomb of David's father, Jesse, that is there 
in Hebron. To be told: Oh, no, this needs to be Palestinian lands. The 
reason some of us think that Hebron, Judea, and Samaria should be 
Palestinian lands is because 1,600 years after David ruled from Hebron 
and then Jerusalem, Mohammed came along. Some say it was a vision, some 
say a dream. Some say he actually, during one night, was taken by a 
winged horse or donkey and flown to Jerusalem. Some say he actually got 
there and back to bed before morning. Whatever the case, 1,600 years 
before that did or didn't happen, David was ruling over that whole 
country.
  There is no one alive today descended from any occupants of the 
Promised Land, the land of Israel, descended from people who lived in 
that land predating King David and King Saul before him, King Solomon 
after him--nobody. Nobody alive today has a prior claim. There is 
nobody, no country, from whom the United Nations has demanded a 
secession of land back to people that attacked that country and the 
land was taken back in a defensive mode in protection from the attack.
  So at page 3 of our H. Res. 11, it points out that the U.N. 
resolution is a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state 
solution. At the bottom of page 5, it says: ``A durable and sustainable 
peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will come only 
through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties resulting in 
a Jewish, democratic state living side-by-side next to a demilitarized 
Palestinian state in peace and security.''
  Mr. Speaker, there cannot be peace and security in the Middle East 
when a people are allowed to occupy an area, and those people continue, 
with the encouragement of the United Nations, with John Kerry and this 
President, to conduct intensive terrorism on the people of Israel and 
we continue to condemn the victims of that terrorism.
  You can't have peace in a land where the most powerful nation--
possibly the most powerful nation up to now. We were at one time. Our 
Navy is down, I think, to pre-World War I standards, and our troops are 
down below pre-World War II. But at one time, we were the most powerful 
nation. The most powerful or near most powerful nation is taking up for 
the victims and encouraging that the victims give away more of the land 
that they have already given so much of to those who are inflicting 
terror upon them. It is like my friends on the far left, constantly 
complaining about bullies, who never had been bullied like I was as a 
small child because I was very small in elementary school.

                              {time}  2045

  I got beat up a lot, and I defended myself, but it didn't matter. 
When people are coming after you that are a foot and a half taller than 
you are and they flunked two grades, you are not going to come out 
well.
  My fifth grade teacher, after I got beat up trying to get back my 
football I got for Christmas, took me up in front of the class. My nose 
is still bleeding, dripping down my shirt. She said: I want everybody 
to see what happens when the little boys try to play with the big boys.
  She always took up for the bullies. And that is what this 
administration has been doing and this is what this United Nations has 
been doing: taking up for the terrorist bullies.
  I am amazed that the nation of Israel has held back all hell breaking 
loose on the Gaza Strip because of the continued assaults day after 
day, sending rockets into Israel, Israel spending millions of dollars 
to protect themselves against the constant attack from the Gaza Strip.
  And what happens?
  They try to protect themselves with a legitimate blockade to make 
sure nobody is taking rockets in, and the U.N. and world opinion goes 
nuts over that.
  Page 6 of our resolution we voted on today goes on to say that the 
House of Representatives calls for United Nations Security Council 2334 
to be repealed or fundamentally altered so that it is no longer one-
sided and anti-Israel.
  Here is my problem again. B, it allows all final status issues toward 
a two-state solution be resolved and have direct negotiations between 
the parties.
  Nobody at the U.N., if we are a part of it, and nobody in the United 
States administration should even mention the little phrase ``two-state 
solution.'' This body should not even mention in a resolution that we 
are in any way endorsing a two-state solution.
  I know there are a lot of Christians that aren't as familiar with the 
Bible, perhaps, as they will be one day, but my friend, Joel Rosenberg, 
pointed out numerous times in the book of Joel, chapter 3:

       For look. In those days and at that time I will return the 
     exiles to Judah and Jerusalem. Then I will gather all the 
     nations. I will bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. 
     I will enter into judgment against them there concerning my 
     people Israel, who are my inheritance, whom they scattered 
     among the nations.

  Then it lists the number one grievance that the God of the Bible, the 
God I believe in, had against those nations he is going to rain down 
only hell judgment on. The number one grievance is: they partitioned my 
land. They divided my land, the promised land.
  When the United States Congress embraces, demands that Israel be 
divided into separate states instead of being able to live in, 
peacefully, the land that was occupied and promised over 3,000 years 
ago, I think we are making a big mistake. That is why I had to vote 
``no'' on the resolution.
  Now just as our leadership rushed this resolution to the floor, I am 
hopeful they will rush H. Res. 311 to the floor. I filed it today, this 
afternoon. H. Res. 311 is very basic. It says:

[[Page 329]]

  ``To withhold United States assessed and voluntary contributions to 
the United Nations, and for other purposes.
  ``Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
  ``Section 1. Short title.
  ``This Act may be cited as the `Refusing to Assist Paying for United 
Nations Actions Against Israel Act'''.
  United States assessed involuntary contributions to the United 
Nations. That is section 2. And the operative wording says:
  ``No funds are authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made 
available for assessed or voluntary contributions of the United States 
to the United Nations or to any organ, specialized agency, commission, 
treaty or treaty body, or other affiliated body of the United Nations . 
. . ''
  It goes on: `` . . . until such time as United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 2334, regarding Israel's Settlements in the West 
Bank and East Jerusalem, is repealed in its entirety.''
  Then, section 3 says: ``No funds are authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available to pay interest on assessed or voluntary 
contributions that are withheld under this Act.''
  So the purpose of that is I am hoping and praying that this body will 
not just pay lip service to a U.N. resolution, and actually embrace, as 
John Kerry, apparently, was saying that day, not much difference 
between AIPAC's position in supporting this resolution. He may not have 
mentioned they would support the resolution, but AIPAC's position and 
John Kerry's position. If you look at what is in the resolution, he may 
have something there.
  This would actually put some teeth into it. This is something that 
would send a message to the United Nations and the nations around the 
world that if you are going to continue to be so anti-Israel, so 
bigoted, so racist, so anti-Jewish, then the United States is not going 
to continue to fund your outrageous, bigoted activities, your lush, 
lavish lifestyle.
  I would think if we could pass this, the United Nations delayed in 
withdrawing that resolution or rescinding it, then that should 
ultimately lead to our denial of any visas to diplomats of the United 
Nations. Then, once that occurs, apparently under the deed to the 
United Nations, it was only for such time as the headquarters in New 
York--is the main headquarters of the United Nations. So if they can't 
get diplomats there, they will have to move the headquarters elsewhere 
and that land would be ceded back to the foundation.
  Hopefully, if we will go ahead and do something that has teeth in it 
and not embrace language that will be fatal to this nation of Israel, 
we can make a difference. That can bring peace in the world. Terrorists 
only understand power, and sometimes power is conveyed in the way of 
money.
  We should not be funding a United Nations that is so bigoted and so 
hateful to the nation of Israel.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________