Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is the President went to war with Iraq because of two reasons: One, weapons of mass destruction; and two, the threat to security in the Middle East and the United States of America, and because there were indications of a connection between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. And there is documentation even stated in the 9/11 Commission report or in the 9/11 Commission statement.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, since we are going back in history, let me just say that we had the attack on the World Trade Center the first time in 1993; in 1996 we had the Khobar Towers; in 1998, we had embassy attacks in Nairobi; in 2000, we had the USS Cole, all during the previous administration. And during that time when Osama bin laden was in the Sudan, there were 13 known-terrorist training camps under his control, and the CIA reported those to the previous administration, and nothing was done about it. So when we start talking about this administration's being asleep at the switch, the fact is that President Bush, when he took over, decided to do something about it because there were contacts between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. Uday Hussein had one of the leaders of al Qaeda just last year in Baghdad for medical treatment. They had a very close relationship. So my question to my colleagues is this: Why did the previous administration not, when they knew there were 13 terrorist training camps in the Sudan, they knew that Osama bin Laden was there, they knew that the CIA had talked about it and said let us go in and get him, and they did not do a doggone thing after all these attacks on U.S. installations?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman will yield briefly, Condoleezza Rice, the Vice President and a whole host of National Security Council members were at that meeting. The gentleman to whom you are referring is sour grapes because he lost his job as Secretary of the Treasury. Their interpretation and their recall of that meeting does not jibe with that at all. That is his singular opinion. So let me just say that one person's comment at a meeting does not make it so.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. What is that?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if my colleague has read anything that Lee Hamilton, the Democrat co-chairman of the 9-11 Commission, had to say on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer on June 16, just last week, 2004. Let me read what Lee Hamilton said: ``We have solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade. Credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qaeda discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression. Since ``Operation Enduring Freedom,'' we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad. And then Chairman Kean of the committee, along with Chairman Hamilton, said that there definitely were a number of contacts. Chairman Kean called these contacts shadowy, and the administration agrees with them. These were contacts between a deadly terrorist organization that was seeking support in a country that the administration knew had supported other terrorist operations. So to say that nothing was going on, I mean they did not meet to have tea and crumpets. They did not meet just to have an ice cream sundae.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. That is the gentleman's prerogative.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman will yield further, I will be happy to do that, if you ever give me some macadamia nuts.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. 29.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Would my colleague yield for just about a 5- second question?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I have heard the gentleman's arguments. I hope my good and dear friend from Massachusetts will stick around for my response to what he has said.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I hope we have more of these.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green) for his very eloquent statement. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to my good friend, one of the senior members of the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California (Mr. Rohrabacher). I will now yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter).

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) and appreciate that very much.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that eloquent statement. Let me say that the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) will be going into detail in just a few minutes about the reasons why 9-11 occurred. And let me say one more thing, Mr. Speaker, and that is if we had had foresight that Winston Churchill had prior to World War II, we would have saved 50 million lives. President Bush has that foresight, and he is doing the right thing right now.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, all over America, people are honoring the memory of President Ronald Reagan, who passed away on June 5th. Among those who have paid homage to President Reagan's legacy is the Council of Khalistan, led by my friend Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh. Dr. Aulakh wrote an excellent letter to President Bush offering condolences to the American people on President Reagan's passing. He took special note of President Reagan's vision and his efforts to extend freedom all over the world. President Reagan referred to America as ``the shining city on a hill,'' the bright hope for the entire world. It is our job to pick up that torch and continue to promote freedom wherever it is denied. A good start would be to work to extend freedom to all peoples and nations of South Asia. In India, there are 18 official languages. Over 300,000 Christians have been murdered in Nagaland, as well as more than a quarter of a million Sikhs, almost 88,000 Kashmiri Muslims, thousands of Muslims in other parts of the country, and tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and other minorities. Over 52,000 Sikhs are being held as political prisoners, some as long as 20 years, without charge of trial. According to Amnesty International, tens of thousands of other minorities are also being held as political prisoners. A Sikh named Gurnihal Singh Pirzada was recently arrested for attending a meeting of ``dissidents,'' a meeting he says he didn't attend, while noting that it would not have been illegal for him to have done so. This does not sound like freedom or democracy to me. Mr. Speaker, we should give serious thought to reconsidering our aid to India until basic human rights are freely exercised by all, and we should support the very basic principle of democracy through a free and fair plebiscite on independence for the Sikhs of Punjab, Khalistan, for predominantly Christian Nagaland, for Kashmir, and for every nation seeking to free itself from the yoke of Indian oppression. That is the way to bring freedom, security, stability, dignity, and prosperity to one of the world's most troubled regions. Perhaps the best memorial we can give to President Reagan is to help the people of South Asia achieve their freedom, just as we did in so many other countries during his Administration. I would like to have the text of Council of Khalistan's letter to President Bush placed into the Congressional Record following my statement. Council of Khalistan Washington, DC, June 15, 2004. The Honorable George W. Bush, President of the United States, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear President Bush: On behalf of over 500,000 Sikh Americans and the 25 million strong Sikh Nation, I would like to send our condolences to the people of the United States on the passing of President Ronald Reagan. Although his illness had already taken him from us in many ways, the finality of his death is still a cause for grief. We appreciated your very classy remarks at President Reagan's state funeral, as well as those of your father, Lady Thatcher, and former Prime Minister Mulroney. All of you gave moving tributes to President Reagan that helped to inspire and uplift a grieving nation. President Reagan was a great American leader. His rise from humble beginnings in Dixon, Illinois to becoming a sportscaster, a movie star, governor, and President inspires us all to continue trying to achieve the very highest and best that we can. His Words, ``Whatever else history may say about me when I'm gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears; to your confidence rather than your doubts. My dream is that you will travel the road ahead with liberty's lamp guiding your steps and opportunity's arm steadying your way'' serve as an inspiration to Americans of all backgrounds today. That is exactly how he will be remembered. President Reagan believed in the greatness of America and its people and in extending freedom throughout the world. His work in defeating the Soviet Union and in restoring the American economy marked the greatness of President Reagan and of the people of the country he so loved. We must continue to extend freedom in his memory. One place where freedom needs to be extended is the Indian subcontinent. Today in India, the Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, almost 88,000 Kashmiri Muslims since 1988, over 300,000 Christians in Nagaland, and tens of thousands of other minorities. More than 52,000 Sikhs as well as tens of thousands of other minorities are held as political prisoners without charge or trial, some since 1984. I hope that you will press India to support human rights and self-determination for these oppressed minorities. I am convinced that this would be a great follow-through to President Reagan's vision. Once again, our condolences to the American people on the loss of President Reagan. Sincerely, Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President, Council of Khalistan

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, this month marks the 20th anniversary of one of the most brutal attacks in history, the Indian government's military attack on the Golden Temple, which is the center and seat of the Sikh religion. Attacking the Golden Temple is the equivalent of attacking the Vatican or Mecca. The Golden Temple was under siege from June 3 to June 6, 1984, under a Congress Party government led by Indira Gandhi, whose daughter-in-law Sonia Gandhi is now the President of the Congress Party and its floor leader in Parliament. As you know, the supposedly secular Congress Party was recently swept back into power in India's elections. But for minorities, it doesn't really matter whether the Congress Party or the just-ousted Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is in power. Either way, the repression continues. Although there is a Sikh Prime Minister in India, he has no real power. He is at the mercy of Mrs. Gandhi. India continues to hold 52,268 Sikh political prisoners without charge, trial, or access to legal counsel, according to the Movement Against State Repression (MASR.) India has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since June 1984. Another 50,000 have ``disappeared.'' These are not the tactics of a democracy, Mr. Speaker. They are the tactics of a police state. What is India afraid of? Are they scared of a little free speech? 125 other Sikh Gurdwaras were also attacked at the same time. In all, over 20,000 Sikhs were murdered in this brutal attack, known as Operation Bluestar. These included major spokesmen for Sikh freedom such as Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, General Shabeg Singh, and others. The Sikh holy scriptures, the Guru Granth Sahib, written in the time that the ten Sikh Gurus lived, was shot full of bullet holes by the Indian forces. Young Sikh boys, ages 8 to 13, were taken out in the courtyard and asked whether they supported Khalistan, the independent Sikh state. When they answered with the Sikh religious incantation ``Bole So Nihal,'' they were shot to death. The Golden Temple attack made it clear that there is no place for Sikhs in supposedly secular and democratic India. As Bhindranwale himself said, ``If India attacks the Golden Temple, it will lay the foundation stone for Khalistan.'' On October 7, 1987, Khalistan formally declared itself independent from India. India claims that there is no support for Khalistan. Then let them test the issue democratically at the ballot box by holding a free and fair plebiscite in Punjab, Khalistan on the subject of independence. The Sikh Nation had sovereignty before, from 1710 to 1716 and from 1765 to 1849. No Sikh representative has ever signed India's constitution. The Sikhs have a heritage of freedom from their Gurus and they will be free again. Iraq is becoming a free country and will soon have a representative government. In the 21st century, you cannot suppress people for long. The people must determine their own fate. Only a free Khalistan will enable the Sikhs to live in peace, freedom, dignity, and prosperity. This cannot happen as long as their homeland is under Indian control. If the Sikhs were the only victims of Indian repression, that would be bad enough. They are not. India has killed over 300,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1947. It has killed priests, raped nuns, attacked Christian schools, prayer halls, and festivals, expelled and killed missionaries, and carried out other atrocities against the Christian community. In short, it is not safe to be a Christian in India today. India has killed over 87,000 Muslims in Kashmir since 1988. Between 2,000 and 5,000 Muslims were massacred in Gujarat while the police were ordered to stand aside. Even India's own Human Rights Commission found evidence that the government pre-planned the Gujarat massacre. Amnesty International says that tens of thousands of minorities are being held as political prisoners. This is unacceptable in any country, Mr. Speaker, especially a country that proclaims itself democratic. The Sikhs cannot forget or forgive the brutal Golden Temple attack. Neither can the other minorities forget the brutality that has been done to them. That is why America must act. Not one dollar of U.S. aid should be provided to India until basic human rights are respected. India can start by releasing all its political prisoners. We should also demand that India hold a free and fair plebiscite on the issue of independence for Khalistan, for Kashmir, for Nagaland, and for all the nations seeking their freedom. Multinational states like India are inherently unstable, as the examples of Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union show. And the essence of democracy is the right to self- determination. It is time for the United States to take a stand for democracy, freedom, and stability. Mr. Speaker, on June 5, the Council of Khalistan sponsored a demonstration to commemorate the Golden Temple attack. I would like to have the text of the Council of Khalistan's Press Release regarding this event placed into the Congressional Record following my statement. [Press Release from the Council of Khalistan June 5, 2004] Sikhs Commemorate 20th Anniversary of Golden Temple Attack Washington, D.C.--Sikhs from Philadelphia, Florida, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, and elsewhere on the East Coast came to Washington, D.C. to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the Indian government's brutal military attack on the Golden Temple, the center and seat of the Sikh religion, and 125 other Sikh Gurdwaras throughout Punjab, in which over 20,000 Sikhs were murdered. They chanted slogans such as ``India out of Khalistan'', ``Khalistan Zindabad'', and others. During the attack, young boys ages 8 to 13 were taken outside and asked if they supported Khalistan, the independent Sikh country. When they answered with the Sikh religious incantation ``Bole So Nihal,'' they were shot. The Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh holy scriptures, written in the time of the Sikh Gurus, were shot full of bullet holes and burned by the Indian forces. The Golden Temple attack was a brutal chapter in India's repression of the Sikhs, according to Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan, the government pro tempore of Khalistan, which leads the struggle for Khalistan's independence. ``This brutal attack clarified that there is no place in India for Sikhs,'' Dr. Aulakh said. On October 7, 1987, Khalistan declared its independence from India. ``Sant Bhindranwale said that attacking the Golden Temple would lay the foundation stone of Khalistan, and he was right,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``Instead of crushing the Sikh movement for Khalistan, as India intended, the attack strengthened it,'' he said. ``Just last year, Sardar Atinder Pal Singh, a former Member of Parliament, held a seminar on Khalistan in Punjab. It was well attended and featured outstanding presentations, including one by Professor Gurtej Singh, IAS, Professor of Sikhism,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``The flame of freedom still burns bright in the hearts of Sikhs despite the deployment of over half a million Indian troops to crush it,'' he said. ``Dal Khalsa, a Sikh political party, held marches through Punjab demanding the establishment of an independent Khalistan.'' History shows that multinational states such as India are doomed to failure. Countries like Austria-Hungary, India's longtime friend the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and others prove this point. India is not a single country; it is a polyglot like those countries, thrown together for the convenience of the British colonialists. It is doomed to break up as they did. The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, more than 300,000 Christians since 1948, over 87,000 Muslims in Kashmir since 1988, and tens of thousands of Tamils, Assamese, Manipuris, Dalits, and others. The Indian Supreme Court called the Indian government's murders of Sikhs ``worse than a genocide.'' Indian police arrested human-rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra after he exposed their policy of mass cremation of Sikhs, in which over 50,000 Sikhs have been arrested, tortured, and murdered, then their bodies were declared unidentified and secretly cremated. He was murdered in police custody. His body was not given to his family. The police never released the body of former Jathedar of the Akal Takht Gurdev Singh Kaunke after SSP Swaran Singh Ghotna murdered him. Ghotna has never been brought to trial for the Jathedar Kaunke murder. No one has been brought to justice for the kidnapping and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra. According to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), 52,268 Sikhs are being held as political prisoners in India without charge or trial. Some have been in illegal custody since 1984! ``These prisoners never committed any crime but peacefully speaking out for Sikh freedom,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``What is a democracy doing holding political prisoners?,'' he asked. ``This alone shows that for Sikhs and other minorities, there is no democracy, no freedom of speech.'' ``As Professor Darshan Singh, a former Jathedar of the Akal Takht, said, `If a Sikh is not a Khalistani, he is not a Sikh','' Dr. Aulakh noted. ``We must continue to pray for and work for our God-given birthright of freedom,'' he said. ``Without political power, religions cannot flourish and nations perish.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I was regrettably delayed in my return to Washington, DC and therefore unable to be on the House Floor for rollcall votes 236, 237, 238 and 239. Had I been here I would have voted ``aye'' for rollcall vote 236, ``aye'' for rollcall vote 237, ``aye'' for rollcall vote 238, and ``aye'' for rollcall vote 239.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, since its establishment 55 years ago, Israel has built a nation, forged a new and dynamic society, and created a unique and vital economic, political, cultural, and intellectual life despite the heavy costs of six wars, unrelenting terrorism, frequent international ostracism, and economic boycotts. The people of Israel have established a vibrant and functioning pluralistic and democratic political system that guarantees the freedoms of speech and of the press, free, fair, and open elections, and respect for the rule of law. For over half a century, the United States and Israel have maintained a special relationship based on mutually shared democratic values, common strategic interests, and moral bonds of friendship and mutual respect; most importantly, the people of the United States have an affinity for the people of Israel, and regard Israel as a strong and trusted ally and an important strategic partner. Because of the confluence of energy, money, weapons and ideology, stability in the Middle East is crucial to America's security and success in the global war on terror. Israel, with its technological capabilities and shared system of values, has a key role to play as the most vital U.S. ally in the region. Strengthening the U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation has been at the heart of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) mission since its inception in 1976. Founded as a result of the lessons learned from the 1973 Yom Kippur War, JINSA communicates with the national security establishment and the general public to explain the role Israel can and does play in bolstering American interests, as well as the link between American defense policy and the security of Israel. Over the years, JINSA has achieved a well-deserved reputation as a credible and independent resource. I recently met with my good friend Tom Neumann, JINSA's Executive Director, regarding the current situation in the Middle East, particularly Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's controversial plan to withdraw Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip. During that meeting, Tom presented me with a copy of a JINSA Board of Directors' Resolution stressing the importance of American support for the right of the duly- elected Government of Israel to make those decisions independently and not be pressured by friendly or unfriendly governments. As the Resolution says, ``the first obligation and chief priority of every sovereign government is to defend and protect its own citizens and territory; and the government of Israel, no less than that of the United States, acts upon that right.'' I would like to have the text of this Resolution placed into the Congressional Record following my statement, and I urge my colleagues to read it in its entirety. Support for America's Democratic Allies In Their Internal Decision- making Processes Resolution of the Board of Directors of JINSA June 6, 2004. Whereas JINSA is an American non-profit association concerned with American defense policy and the relationship between the United States and our democratic allies, and Israel is one of those allies; Whereas the first obligation and chief priority of every sovereign government is to defend and protect its own citizens and territory; and the government of Israel, no less than that of the United States, acts upon that right; Whereas this right cannot be subjugated to demands of foreign governments or entities, irrespective of a country's ``best friend'' or most important trading partners; [In the case of Israel, these would be the United States and the European Union, respectively.] Whereas the chief priority of ``The Quartet'' [the US, the UN, the EU and Russia] is movement on the Road Map toward the establishment of Israeli-Palestinian peace through a negotiated two-state settlement, and any unilateral action by Israel might thus be considered interference with the Road Map process, or more broadly with the ``peace process''; Whereas in the view of the Prime Minister of Israel there is no Palestinian partner for steps in the Road Map and instead of waiting for the Palestinians to produce one, he has chosen to make unilateral decisions about how Israel can best protect its citizens during the current war. There is in this an implicit threat that if Israel takes enough unilateral actions, the Palestinians might find themselves with nothing left to decide; Whereas President Bush officially welcomed Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza disengagement plan and reiterated the United States' ``steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders;'' and President Bush specifically recognized the reality of Jews residing east of the 1948 armistice line and rejected the claims of Palestinians of a right to settle in Israel; And whereas Israel, being a democracy, has engaged both in an intense national and governmental debate about the parameters of the Prime Minister's plan; Therefore, The Board of Directors of JINSA resolves to commend President Bush for his clear and forthright commitment (1) to the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state, (2) to the right of Israel to defensible borders, and (3) to a peaceful settlement between Israel and the Palestinians subject to the Palestinians making good their previous security and other commitments; The Board specifically commends the President's recognition of Israel's right to determine for itself what actions are required to ensure the future safety and security of its people. The Board strongly hopes that the nature of this recognition is all-encompassing and not just limited to decisions Israel might make with which the United States is in agreement. Even if JINSA does not agree with some elements of any proposed plan, the Board further resolves to support the right of the duly elected Government of Israel to make those decisions and not be pressured by friendly or unfriendly governments, The Board strongly believes the President and the American people should be encouraged to tell Israel, our ally in the war against terrorists and the swamps that breed them, that we will stand with it as its government determines what steps are necessary to defend and protect it--as we ourselves have done. The Board further urges the other members of the Road Map ``Quartet,'' to recognize the right of a democratic country to determine without outside pressure what actions serve the goals of its security and meaningful progress towards peace. The Board urges Congress to make a similar declaration without reservation.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I was regrettably delayed in my return to Washington, DC and therefore unable to be on the House Floor for rollcall votes 232, 233, 234 and 235. Had I been here I would have voted ``yea'' for rollcall vote 232, ``yea'' for rollcall vote 233, ``yea'' for rollcall vote 234, and ``yea'' for rollcall vote 235.