Louie Gohmert RSS Articles

Gohmert: Pakistani province’s independence would create ally in Mideast

Wed, 22 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Independence for an obscure province in Pakistan would be one of the best things America could leave behind when it withdraws troops next year, the congressman from Northeast Texas said Tuesday.

U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, says an independent Balochistan would be the “enemy of our enemies,” on a piece of ground through which arms now flow to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

“These people are Muslims, but they are friends. They want to be America’s friends,” Gohmert said of the Baloch people of western Pakistan. “Before 1948, they were not part of Pakistan. (Baloch annexation) gave Pakistan some mineral-rich areas as well, and at the same time the Pakistani government has been abusive of the Baloch people.”

It also wouldn’t hurt America’s strategic interests in the region to have a grateful friend on Iran’s eastern border, he added.

Gohmert said he is not advocating a new war front. He said he merely wants discussions to begin about helping the province regain its self-determination.

“I’m for pulling out (of Afghanistan),” he added. “I just want to empower the enemy of the Taliban before we go. ... I want to help people who want to do right and want to be our friends and help us. And I don’t want to help those that want to hurt us — it’s just that simple.”

Gohmert is a co-signer on a House Resolution in support of self-determination for the province on Pakistan’s border with Iran. The resolution’s author, House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., is a Gohmert ally along with fellow co-sponsor, U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

The trio met in January with Baloch leaders in Germany, Gohmert said.

“They were well aware of the constant flow of the supplies and (improvised explosive devices) and arms coming to the Taliban through the Baloch area,” he said.

The three met separately with leaders of Afghanistan’s so-called Northern Alliance, the tribal chiefs who helped American forces sweep the Taliban from Afghan power in the initial part of the war immediately following 9/11.

Those leaders reported to the congressional delegation the Taliban is putting out word it will fully retake the country when Americans leave at the end of 2013. They said the Taliban demanded any groups “that have not been faithful” to them ask their forgiveness and beg for safety.

Gohmert also said the Baloch leaders disputed official American claims the Taliban is weakening in Afghanistan. As evidence, he pointed to the flow of weapons feeding the enemy through the Baloch province in Pakistan.

“So, let’s empower the enemy of our enemy,” Gohmert said the three lawmakers concluded. “That’s (the enemy) of the Northern Alliance and of the Taliban across the border in Balochistan. They are our friends. They want to be our friends.”

Gohmert said America first armed the Northern Alliance, then took the weapons away and turned support toward the centralized government that forced its will on the alliance tribes.

“There is one president (of Afghanistan) — he appoints the governors, he appoints the mayors, he appoints the police,” Gohmert said. “And the Northern Alliance leaders said, like two things to me: ‘You’re going to desert us, and the Taliban is going to be in charge and kill us. So, give us our arms back and let us elect our own leaders.’ ”

Rohrabacher produced his resolution supporting Baloch independence following a foreign relations subcommittee hearing two weeks ago regarding the province. Leaders of Baloch attended, he said.

“Man, it was packed,” Gohmert said, adding the provincial leaders praised his efforts. “They keep calling me, ‘The Hero of Baloch.’ I’m just an East Texas guy trying to think about the most effective way to not empower your enemy when you leave. They’d be great allies to have. They love America.”

U.S. lawmaker seeks answers after State Department error releases Mexican fugitive from Texas jail

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

A former Mexican government official wanted for embezzling millions was arrested in Texas this month, then promptly ordered released by the State Department in a case that has one lawmaker demanding answers.

A day after pulling rank on Smith County law enforcement officials, the State Department rescinded the order. But Hector Hernandez Javier Villarreal was gone by then. Now Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) is calling for congressional hearings to find out what happened.

“That’s the question: What are the federal officials thinking? The State Department is screwing up by ordering locals to release these fugitives,” Gohmert said. “I don’t know if it’s corruption or incompetence, but it’s one or the other and in my experience with federal government, I’m guessing it’s incompetence.”

Villarreal, the former secretary executive of the Tax Administration Service of Coahulia, Mexico, was arrested in November there on charges relating to an alleged scheme involving embezzling millions of dollars from the Mexican government. He posted $1 million cash bond, got himself a U.S. visa and then skipped town.

Villarreal surfaced in Tyler, Texas, on Feb. 1, when he, his wife Maria Teresita Botello and another man were pulled over for a routine stop. The couple’s two children were also in the car and turned over to child protective services.

“All we did was make a traffic stop; they didn’t have a front license plate,” Smith County Sheriff J.B. Smith told FoxNews.com.

Police were given permission to search the vehicle and found $67,000 in cash and a shotgun, Smith said.

“When we ran the check on the shotgun, then all of a sudden everyone in federal government became interested -- ATF, FBI, Homeland Security, Immigration [ICE] all showed up,” Smith said.

He said Homeland Security officials had told his department that Villarreal was a high-profile and wanted fugitive.

“We placed them in jail on money-laundering charges, seized the vehicle and the money, ICE came and picked them up from our jail and took them to Dallas and that’s the last we’ve seen or heard of them,” Smith said.

Villarreal and Botello posted bond, and on Feb. 6 were released into the custody of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. They were taken to a Dallas detention center for deportation.

That’s when the State Department intervened, according to Smith. He said Homeland Security officials called to tell him the federal diplomatic agency had ordered Villarreal and his wife released. Neither State Department nor ICE officials responded to FoxNews.com’s request for comment.

Gohmert, who sits on the Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, says he’ll be calling for congressional hearings to look into who exactly ordered the fugitive’s release.

He said he had been told that State Department officials released Villarreal because he entered the country on a valid U.S. visa, even though as an international fugitive, he should have been deported. Gohmert also wants to know why Villarreal was granted a visa days after posting $1 million bond following his arrest in Mexico. The visa Villarreal was granted was an EB-5, which is given to foreigners who invest at least $500,000 in a business venture.

One day after ordering Villarreal’s release, State Department officials referenced the Mexican warrant and asked for local authorities to re-arrest the couple. But by then, it was too late.

In addition to wanting to find out why State gave the conflicting orders, Gohmert wants to know why the federal authorities issued a visa to a man under arrest in Mexico.

“We need to look at the visa program [EB-5] that allows foreigners to simply invest $500,000 in a venture and we give them a visa,” he said. “This is allowing wealthy foreigners to buy a visa.”

“Hopefully we can pursue the matter and get some answers,” he said.

Smith said he was waiting to see what happens next. The suspects are supposed to appear at an as-yet unscheduled arraignment on the local charges. Although they have hired attorneys, Smith has his doubts that they will appear.

“If I was a betting man, I’d say no,” Smith said.

‘They want to live!’: Congressmen’s March for Life speeches surprisingly personal

Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

The speeches before the annual March for Life in the nation’s capital are rousing, pointed, and poignant. This year’s speeches were also surprisingly personal.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-TX, credited his experience with his own baby for his pro-life views. He said, “Having allowed my child, prematurely born by 10 weeks, to hold onto my finger for eight hours non-stop I came to know, they want to live! They want to live!”

Michigan Congressman Tim Walberg spoke alongside his wife, Susan. “We have four grandkids: one in Heaven, two on the ground, and one in the womb. Who says you can’t be a grandparent of one who is pre-birth but who is alive?” he said.

A former pastor who worked at Moody Bible Institute, Walberg called the pro-life movement “a force of redemption…Redeeming those who have been consigned to death without their choice. Redeeming the young ladies who have been sold a bill of goods, that is a lie.”

Others said they came to oppose abortion through meeting children who ran a high risk of being aborted. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas, said, “I’m here today with my wife, Angela, and three of our four adopted children. Isn’t adoption great?”

Rep. Phil Roe used his background delivering children to explain why he opposes their deaths in the womb. “For the last 31 years, I’m a pro-life ob/gyn doc that has delivered almost 5,000 children,” the Tennessee congressman said. “The group that I’m in has delivered almost most than 25,000 children during that time…I cannot imagine this word without those great people.” He noted with pride that he later recommended a baby he delivered for the Air Force Academy. He vowed, “You have my solemn promise, with the last breath in my body, I will fight for life in this great nation.”

Although the March for Life shines the spotlight on the evils of abortion, it celebrates life at all its stages and opposes the taking of innocent life in all forms. Bobby Schindler of the Terri Schiavo Life and Hope Network said politicians who claim to be pro-life have the responsibility “to protect all innocent life, including those persons like my sister, Terri Schiavo.”

“We must understand the reality that the deliberate killing of our brain-injured is also happening in countless health care facilities across the country every single day,” he said. “If we don’t defend the value and dignity of our disabled, elderly, and medically vulnerable brothers and sistersm, we will never defeat this insidious culture of death.”

Schindler was introduced by Br. Paul O’Donnell of the Franciscan Brothers of Peace, who said the pro-life movement must “proclaim that we will not let ObamaCare kill the pre-born child, or the elderly or the disabled. Remember that euthanasia follows abortion, just as night will follow this day.”

Missouri’s Vicky Hartzler showed pride in being one member of a “group of pro-life women in Congress.”

Other speakers underlined how the right to life safeguards all other constitutional liberties.

Congressman Allen West, R-FL, who was greeted with perhaps the most enthusiastic round of applause of all the day’s speakers, said, “There is no cause more important for preserving [American] freedom than reaffirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, a right without which no other rights have any meaning.”

“This fight does not end until we protect our unborn,” he said.

“Our founding fathers had it right when they said our Creator had endowed us with certain unalienable rights,” said Ohio Republican Bill Johnson, “and it was no accident that life was the first one of those rights that they mentioned.” He promised “to continue to fight Washington to prevent your tax dollars from funding abortion.”

Several of the speakers, including March for Life founder Nellie Gray, said the marchers’ resilience was a testament to their dedication.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky planned to address the gathering but was detained in a high-visibility run-in with the TSA.

Rep. Gohmert Stands in Support of Saving the American Dream

Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Earlier this week, Representative Louie Gohmert (R–TX) visited The Heritage Foundation to show his support for Saving the American Dream ^[1] as well as our nationwide educational effort with the Family Research Council, the Your Money, Your Values, Your Vote 2012 Tour ^[2].

Rep. Louie Gohmert voices his support for Saving the American Dream

Speaking to an impromptu audience gathered at Heritage, Gohmert’s passion for America’s future came through loud and clear:

Some people get so confused about the pursuit of happiness. They think the Constitution guarantees people a right to be happy. That’s up to us! The pursuit of happiness comes from opportunity. It does not come from a government that spends future generations’ money. We are forging chains out of mountainous debt—chains we are shackling on children that haven’t even been born yet. That is so irresponsible, so selfish.

My wife and I used to teach college Sunday school. We would notice that the students who were focused on themselves were so depressed; they were always fussing about things. We would say, “Look at the other folks around you, and you’ll see: ‘Wow, I’ve got a lot to be thankful for.’ Begin to help other people out, and you feel better about life.” This is a moral issue. When we are so focused on ourselves, we cannot enjoy the things and people around us. We would make our way out of the morass we’re in as a nation if we start to look ahead.

I love this Saving the American Dream ^[1] plan. Simplify taxes. Redesign Medicare and Social Security. Cut government spending. Reform health care. Protect America by fully funding defense needs. Leave our children and grandchildren with a better life.

People say, “We’ve got some really hard choices to make.” I don’t see that they should be hard choices. We’re currently spending a trillion dollars more than we did in 2007 and 2008. Nobody in America that I heard from during those years—Democrat, Republican, or Independent—ever said, “We’re just not spending enough money.” Once you see what we’re really dealing with, it’s not a hard choice.

The tour bus stopped at The Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC this week. Photo: Chas Geer.

Briefly touring the Values Bus, Gohmert concluded, “I hope we have lots of people come out to the bus and figure out: This is the responsible choice, and it’s the only choice. That’s why I’m so grateful you all are bringing this to life. If you tried to do this without Family Research Council and The Heritage Foundation, you just wouldn’t have the resonance.”

This weekend, Your Money, Your Values, Your Vote 2012 Tour will make stops at several events in Arizona—then it’s on to Texas, Tennessee, and beyond. Visit ValuesBus.com ^[2] for the latest schedule.

THE LIMBAUGH LETTER: Rep. Louie Gohmert's Conversation with Rush Limbaugh

Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) appeared in the 2012 January edition of The Limbaugh Letter.

Click here to read the full six-page interview with Rush Limbaugh.

Reprinted with permission ©2012 The Limbaugh Letter

Rep. Gohmert’s Statement on The Baseline Reform Act

Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) released the following statement today after The Baseline Reform Act passed out of the Budget Committee by a vote of 21-12; this bill was authored by Rep. Rob Woodall (R-GA) and inspired by Rep. Louie Gohmert’s Zero Baseline Budget Act:

“Since my first term here in 2005, I have been pushing to end the automatic increases in every federal department’s budget. Having filed the bill that would do that in each term of Congress I’ve been in, also pushing for its passage out of Committee and to the floor, it is now great to see that it has finally happened. When I was a judge without Congress even on my radar, I heard Rush Limbaugh discussing the insanity of the automatic increases annually. When I got here, it seemed like a no-brainer, but even when we had the majority in 2005-2006, I could not get them to bring it up for a vote. Not being on the committee of jurisdiction, I had no objections whatever to Congressman Woodall on the Budget Committee filing it as a new bill and pushing it through the committee with the full support of Chairman Paul Ryan.

It is important to note this passage means that Chairman Paul Ryan is a man of his word. He promised me at the end of July he would get the Zero-Baseline Budget Bill passed out of his committee and he has. It now will move to the floor as the Speaker has assured me it will, and I have no doubt it will pass there. Then Senators will pass it to accolades or fail to pass it at their great political peril. Americans understand that they have tightened their belts and it is inexcusable if the federal government says we simply cannot tighten ours. Congressman Woodall and Chairman Ryan are to be commended as America will be the better for the tremendous savings to the American people when it finally becomes law, with this House and this Senate, or a Senate with a new Republican majority if this Senate fails to pass it after we do.

When this does become law, Representatives and Senators can also finally advocate with for no increase in a federal department’s budget without being vilified as happened in the past for “’draconian cuts.’”

Congressman Louie Gohmert is the Vice Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Prior to being elected to serve in Congress, Louie was elected to three terms as District Judge in Smith County, Texas. He also served as Chief Justice of Texas'12th Court of Appeals.

# # #

Rep. Louie Gohmert’s Remarks at the 39th Annual March for Life Rally

Mon, 23 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Today, Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) spoke at the 39^th Annual March for Life Rally on the National Mall in Washington, DC and delivered the following speech expressing his unwavering passion to defend the sanctity of life:

“Scripture, or as Benjamin Franklin called it ‘the sacred writing’ says, ‘Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior so are the children of one’s youth. Happy is the person has a quiver full of them.’ Fifty-two million dead children is not a reward. That number indicts us and condemns us for our selfishness. My dear friends for life, the same selfish arrogance or reckless disregard for human life would also allow one generation to selfishly and arrogantly forge chains of mountainous debt from self-centered, uncontrolled spending. This spending will be set on the shoulders of those who are born in the near future. God or nature brings together a sperm and egg, and what God has brought together, let no man tear asunder. You and I know it; but, we must ever and always say it – liberty and the pursuit of happiness cannot begin until we allow life.”

On January 22, 1974, the first March for Life was held on the West Steps of the Capitol. An estimated 20,000 committed pro-life Americans rallied that day on behalf of our preborn brothers and sisters. To learn more about the March for Life, please visit www.marchforlife.org

# # #

Wikipedia, Other Sites Go Dark Over Proposed SOPA, PIPA Bills

Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

In a move that heightens the growing tension between Silicon Valley and Hollywood, Wikipedia and other websites went dark Wednesday in protest of two congressional proposals intended to thwart the online piracy of copyrighted movies and TV programs.

The web-based encyclopedia is part of a loose coalition of dot-coms and large technology companies that fear Congress is prepared to side with Hollywood and enact extreme measures -- possibly including the blocking of entire websites -- to stop the online sharing and unauthorized use of Hollywood productions.

In East Texas, congressmen and nonprofit officials expressed concern about the proposals' unintended fallout.

U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, said he did not sign on to the bill because he had early questions and concerns about negative unintended consequences the legislation may pose to commerce and free speech. He said the theft of billions-of-dollars in intellectual property each year is a concern but that the legislation, as written, would have created major hurdles for legal information sharing and online entrepreneurs.

"We have got to do something about online theft. I just believe you need to enforce the law," he said. "But you've got to be careful that you don't punish people who are not aware they are breaking the law."

Gohmert said the public outcry already has led to adjustments to the proposed legislation. He said he believes legislators and industry leaders from both web-based companies and those representing copyright holders can come to agreement on laws to protect intellectual property and will not impede internet commerce.

Christina Fulsom, executive director of People Attempting to Help in Tyler, is concerned about the potential of the legislation.

"It certainly could hurt all nonprofits from the way I've seen it described, but especially PATH," she said. "We rely so much on our website. People contribute online and learn about poverty online."

The fight will test which California-based industry has the most sway in Washington.

For now, Silicon Valley appears to have the upper hand. Supporters of the legislation -- called the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House and the Protect Intellectual Property Act in the Senate -- say the bills are aimed at protecting jobs in the movie and music industries. But a campaign including tech heavyweights such as Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. has successfully portrayed the bills as an attack on a free and open Internet.

"It has nothing to do with stolen songs or movies," said Justin Ruben, executive director of MoveOn.org, which is participating in the blackout. Ruben says tougher legislation -- even directed overseas -- could make domestic cultural commentators more prone to legal attack.

Rather than showing encyclopedia articles, Wikipedia displayed a blacked-out page describing the protest and offering more information on the bills. Many articles were still viewable on cached pages.

Reddit.com shut down its social news service for 12 hours. Other sites made their views clear without cutting off services. Google blacked out the logo on its home page, directing people to a page where they could add their names to a petition.

The one-day outage was timed to coincide with key House and Senate committee hearings as they prepare to send the bills to the full floor for debate.

However, sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican, sought last week to remove a controversial provision from the House bill that could force Internet service providers to interfere with the way web addresses work for foreign sites deemed dedicated to piracy. He postponed work on the measure until February.

Critics believe such tinkering with core Internet technology treads into dangerous territory that could lead to online censorship. It might also give hackers a new way to wreak havoc.

The White House raised concerns that the bills could stifle innovation. Over the weekend, the Obama administration reacted to two online petitions, saying it "will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet."

At the same time, the administration called on all sides to "pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders."

That nuanced stance is President Barack Obama's attempt at "threading the needle" between two important constituencies as he seeks re-election in November, said Jeffrey Silva, a technology policy analyst at Medley Global Advisors in Washington.

On the one hand, his administration has defended a free, open Internet as it watched repressive regimes fall in the Middle East with help from social media such as Twitter. It has also been a proponent of the concept of "net neutrality," which prevents Internet service providers from slowing online traffic that comes from file-sharing sites known to trade in pirated content.

On the other hand, Obama and other Democrats have gone to Hollywood dozens of times to raise campaign funds over the years.

"The administration is trying to fight to protect the Internet space," Silva said. "But at the same time, it doesn't want to disenfranchise Hollywood and the business community."

Indeed, behind the protests and public posturing, both Hollywood and Silicon Valley spend generously to lobby causes in Washington. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the movie, television and music industries spent a combined $91.7 million on lobbying efforts in 2011, compared with the computer and Internet industry's $93 million.

In the 2012 election cycle, the movie, television and music industry offered up $7.7 million in direct campaign contributions to congressional candidates. The computer and Internet industry contributed $6.6 million.

Despite the uproar on websites and blogs, PIPA remains firmly in play. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said Tuesday that he intends to push the bill toward a floor vote on Jan. 24. He said much of the criticism of the bill is "flatly wrong."

It remains to be seen whether the two industries can come to the table and negotiate a compromise.

"There are good companies, and then there are companies simply out to preserve the Wild West, free-to-steal business model," said Recording Industry Association of America CEO Cary Sherman. He expects to know "within the next few weeks" whether the legislation can survive.

Lawmakers may have a personal incentive to keep online piracy on the nation's political radar, said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a non-partisan government-accountability watchdog. If the issue stays alive through the current election cycle, it may help bring in campaign contributions from high-tech donors and Hollywood later this year.

The issue "becomes an opportunity for raising more money from these groups," Wertheimer said. "If you're into an important issue and money is flowing in on both sides, then both sides can up the ante

OP-ED: Obama’s Afghan Policy Is Empowering the Taliban

Tue, 17 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

In September 2011 Former President Burhanuddin Rabbani, a key Northern Alliance leader and the only Tajik to be President of Afghanistan, was murdered after Taliban emissaries promised to deliver him an important message of peace. When welcomed, they blew him up.

In August 2011, after a conspiracy that lured in members of our Seal Team Six with other heroic Americans, the Taliban set up an ambush and murdered them.

Following those brutal attacks, President Obama’s strategy has been to hasten negotiations with the Taliban. Additionally, the Obama administration has now not only offered to release known Taliban terrorists from detention, but has already released some and additionally offered to legitimize our sworn enemy by furnishing them a princely office in Qatar.

In return, Obama’s agents defend that they are being tough on the Taliban by demanding that they not use the office to raise funds to support their terrorism. That is a bit reminiscent of the Clinton-Albright demand of North Korea that if we give them nuclear technology, they must promise to use it for electric generation and not weapons.

According to many Afghans, all of these and other Obama Administration actions give substantial credence to the Taliban claim, supported privately by some Pakistani leaders, that the U.S. has lost in Afghanistan and is now begging them for negotiations. One Taliban leader who was released from detention by the Obama administration for medical and end of life purposes, is now back in command and recently demanded on Afghan TV that since the Americans have now lost and are begging for negotiations, Afghans disloyal to the Taliban must come ask forgiveness and for safety from the Taliban.

A Northern Alliance leader says that of the more than 800 Taliban detainees that have been released, he is now seeing many of them fighting, killing and terrorizing again. Yet, the Northern Alliance leaders are being effectively shut out of the plans for the way forward, while being demonized by the American government they helped.

The State Department even went to extraordinary links to attempt preventing the writers from meeting with the Northern Alliance leaders. We were able to meet, with some help from foreign friends, but clearly the Obama administration and its comrades mean for our allies to stay under the bus when they throw them there.

In late 2001-2002, the Taliban were defeated with less than 500 Americans embedded with the Northern Alliance, but now the Taliban is stronger while we have more than 100,000 American troops in Afghanistan. Though Vice-President Biden says the Taliban are not our enemies, American soldiers in Afghanistan say the Taliban are still creating IED’s, firing bullets, firing rockets and doing all they can to kill Americans, so it seemed to them that the Taliban certainly think they are our enemy. This points straight to the fact our military is not the problem; its their commander in chief who is the current weak link in our chain of command.

To date, the U.S. nation-building experiment in Afghanistan has produced instability, violence, skyrocketing drug production, widespread corruption, fraudulently rigged elections and the general disapproval of this new government by its own people. Under the U.S.-approved, Afghan Constitution, President Karzai appoints all governors for the provinces, all mayors, police chiefs, the slate for one third of the Senate candidates, and even a segment of the Class 1 teachers in the country. He even has power of the purse that the U.S. President does not have. Clearly this is a formula for heightened corruption, while isolating and ignoring many ethnic groups that make up the very essence of Afghan society.

Many with first-hand experience fighting the Taliban say they are dependent on Pakistan for their marching orders, strategy, and weaponry. In the meantime, President Karzai’s regime has dropped every pretense of appreciation for American sacrifice in blood and treasure as demonstrated by his recent threats to align with Pakistan, Iran and China even as we continue to prop up his government. From Karzai’s perspective, he may well see the Taliban and Pakistan as holding his fate in their hands once the U.S. pulls out.

At the same time, the U.S. is pouring billions of dollars into Afghanistan that comprises the largest portion of the Afghan government’s own budget. U.S.A.I.D. alone is pouring $3.6 billion a year into the country for aid and projects while the money often fails to get past corrupt government officials with 80 percent going to Taliban areas and a tiny fraction going to areas where our allies reside.

The Afghan leaders have become increasingly enriched as their contempt for us has continued to grow. At President Karzai’s encouragement, we have politically and militarily undermined the natural and historic barrier to the Taliban, which is the non-Pashtun peoples of the North, Central and Western parts of Afghanistan. As these non-Pashtun communities were weakened, their leaders were undermined by U.S. support for Karzai and his concentration of power.

The critical next step should be to insist on a new Constitutional Loya Jirga, or convention, that will draft a new constitution enshrining federalism as the new form of government. This would break the Taliban’s ability to dominate Afghanistan by strengthening those communities opposed to the return of the Taliban and their Al-Qaeda allies. It would give Afghans the kind of hope that our founders provided Americans 225 years ago with our Constitution.

We should insist on local elections of Afghan governors and mayors who may then select the police chiefs. Electing regional leaders would serve to eliminate the conduit of corruption built into the present system, while at the same time giving the governing authority back to the people who are now being disenfranchised.

This course would establish the basis for a political system that allows each of Afghanistan’s ethnic communities to retain their identity and protect them from the Taliban’s violent ethnic repression, brutality and regressive domination. The resulting political framework would also enable trust and goodwill to be built between Afghanistan’s diverse communities as each community would have a direct and important say in its own future.

Perhaps we should even consider support for a Balochistan carved out of Pakistan to diminish radical power there also. Surely, leaving Afghanistan to the same terrorist thugs who enabled the September 11th attacks is the very definition of insanity.The way forward should not include the current Obama plan of putting our future in Taliban hands that are covered with American blood.

Afghan Northern Alliance Allies Betrayed by Obama Administration; Meet with U.S. Congressmen in Berlin

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Today, Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) along with Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46), Loretta Sanchez (CA-47) and Steve King (IA-05) held a press conference in Berlin, Germany, on their private meeting with Northern Alliance Leaders on Afghan Strategy. These leaders who fought with embedded Special Forces to initially defeat the Taliban represent over 60-percent of the Afghan people, yet are being entirely disregarded by the Obama and Karzai Administrations in negotiations. Instead, the Obama regime is choosing to now make concessions to the group that helped train for the 9-11 attacks and whose leader proclaimed on Afghan TV recently that the U.S. has been defeated and is now begging them for negotiations.

Rep. Gohmert and the individuals, listed below, released the following joint statement:

“We have supported the mission of the Coalition Forces in Afghanistan. It is our fervent desire that the Coalition Forces be successful. Yet, after the departure of the Coalition Forces, the enormous American, Coalition, and Afghan investment with their lives and treasure is currently in great peril of having been in vain. Our concern is that the present political system is dysfunctional because all the power is centralized in a way that no American would tolerate in the United States. The current system has fatally concentrated decision-making to whoever is President of the country. The Afghan President appoints the governors of each province and district, the mayor of every town, every provincial chief of police, one third of the entire Senate, and even every judge in Afghanistan.”

“This centralized power has led to massive corruption, disenfranchisement of a large segment of the Afghan people, obstacles to economic development, massive abuses of power, increasing political instability, poor governance, and a vast undermining of law and order.”

“We call for a national dialogue on a revised Constitution to correct the inherent flaws in the present power structure by decentralizing the political system, making it more compatible with the diverse political, social and cultural nature of Afghanistan. The Afghan people deserve and need a parliamentary form of democracy instead of a personality-centered Presidential system.’

“We firmly believe that any negotiation with the Taliban can only be acceptable, and therefore effective, if all parties to the conflict are involved in the process. The present form of discussions with the Taliban is flawed, as it excludes anti-Taliban Afghans. It must be recalled that the Taliban extremists and their Al-Qaeda supporters were defeated by Afghans resisting extremism with minimal human embedded support from the United States and International community. The present negotiations with the Taliban fail to take into account the risks, sacrifices and legitimate interests of the Afghans who ended the brutal oppression of all Afghans.”

“In order to speed the withdrawal of international forces, the participants believe it is essential to strengthen regional and national institutions that are inclusive and represent the concerns of all the communities of Afghanistan.”

“The participants favor a change in the Electoral System from a Single Non Transferable Vote System to a nationally accepted variant of the Proportional Representation system with equal opportunities for independent candidates, the political parties, or tribal representatives. We also support the election of Governors and empowerment of provincial councils. Such elected Governors and provincial councils should also have authority for such things as creating budgets and generating revenue, overseeing police and healthcare, as well as establishing educational authority, if they so desire.”

Mr. Ahmed Zia Massoud, Chairman, National Front

General Abdul Rashid Dostum, Leader, National Islamic Movement of Afghanistan

Haji Mohammad Mohaqiq, Leader, People´s Unity Party of Afghanistan

Mr. Amrullah Saleh, Former Director, Afghan National Security Directorate

Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)

Representative Loretta Sanchez (D-California)

Represenative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)

Representative Steve King (R-Iowa)

Congressman Louie Gohmert is the Vice Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Prior to being elected to serve in Congress, Louie was elected to three terms as District Judge in Smith County, Texas. He also served as Chief Justice of Texas'12th Court of Appeals.

# # #