Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the following law enforcement officers who have been honored by the Horse Shoe Curve Benevolent Association for their service to their communities and continued willingness to put their lives on the line to protect public safety. Virginia State Police Senior Trooper David R. Gray has served the Virginia Department of State Police for 12 years. During his tenure, Trooper Gray has done an outstanding job as a breath alcohol testing operator, a firearms instructor and a field training officer. As a member of the department's crash reconstruction team, Trooper Gray actively assisted with fatal crash investigations and his extensive knowledge in crash investigations and his devotion to training academy members and newer troopers has gained him notoriety with the force. For these reasons, Trooper Gray is often sought out after for his expertise. He continues to serve his community and mentor to his fellow troopers with professionalism. Sergeant Brian Rosenberry has served the Clarke Country Sheriff's Office since 1985, where he began as road deputy. Now, as court services sergeant, Sergeant Rosenberry provides for the safety and security of all of the courts in Clarke County, is responsible for civil processes in the office, as well as budgeting procedures, scheduling and supervising personnel. He was also responsible for establishing a new evidence storage unit and the successful maintenance of other operating procedures. His commitment to the citizens of Clarke County is displayed through his willingness to serve at the sheriff's office and his countless hours as a volunteer firefighter. Deputy Tonya M. Kittoe is the school resource officer for the Frederick County Sheriff's Department at Millbrook High School. In addition to her work at Millbrook High School, she is also a dedicated counselor for the Frederick County Sheriff's Office Youth Camp. Before becoming a counselor, Deputy Kittoe served as the secretary for the Frederick County Sheriff's Office Youth Camp, as well as the activities director. As part of the accreditation team at the sheriff's office, Deputy Kittoe played a pivotal role in the office's initial accreditation and again this summer during reaccreditation. Deputy Kittoe's service at the Frederick County Sheriff's Office is greatly appreciated. Sergeant John R. Austin has served the Winchester Sheriff's Department where he oversees the courthouse and other security operations. Sergeant Austin began his career in law enforcement in 1967 in Prince George's County, Maryland before working at the State Department and the Pentagon. Sergeant Austin is an expert at working with contractors, alarm companies and other issues with the joint judicial center, judges, clerks and deputies and was instrumental in serving the sheriff's office during its accreditation process and was always ready to assist in any way he could. On November 30, 2012, Sergeant Austin retired from his post at the Winchester Sheriff's Department, but his attention to detail and extensive knowledge will be missed. We appreciate his dedicated service to our community. Major David White served a 33 year career with the Winchester Police Department, where he first started as a dispatcher in 1979. Since he became a police officer on the force in 1982, Major White quickly moved up and earned the admiration of his peers. Over the years, he served as polygraph examiner and training officer and also trained in forensic science and command staff. He is a graduate of the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia. During a time of change at the Winchester Police Department from 2007-2010, Major White served as an interim Chief of Police. Major White's patience and leadership during times of adversity at the Winchester Police Department helped the department continue its responsibilities as one of the best police organizations in the country. In October 2012, Major White retired from the police department, but he will always be a committed role model and a mentor to many. Master Patrol Officer Mark F. Castle has served the Berryville Police Department since 2006. He constantly strives to strengthen the department by attending numerous training programs and achieving certifications as a firearms instructor, National Rifle Association instructor, field training officer and police cyclist. Officer Castle has incorporated a variety of drills into the normally static firearms training at the department to aid officers in real-life situations and has helped increase the number of training sessions per year. His constant effort and dedication to bettering the force has gained Officer Castle notoriety among his peers. His service and willingness to share his knowledge with his co-workers is greatly appreciated. Correctional Officer Michelle See began her career at the Northwestern Regional Adult Detention Center in July 2005. She began as a housing unit security officer, where she supervised more than 50 inmates on a routine basis and has recently been promoted to field training officer. Officer See has worked at several different posts at the regional jail, including community correction, visitation, main control and booking. She is known for often working several posts in one shift, which is something that few officers at her level can successfully perform. Her versatility is an important asset to the team and she was recently nominated for employee of the quarter for her determination and loyalty. Officer See has seldom requested to take a shift off and often comes to work early without claiming the time. Her consistent teamwork and professionalism enables Officer See to work extremely well with the public as well as civilian and sworn staff alike. The Horseshoe Curve Benevolent Association, organized in 1997, has been honoring law enforcement officers since 2004. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to recognize these officers for their courage, strength and service to the Tenth District of Virginia.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, yesterday was the 3-month anniversary of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans' lives were tragically lost, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens. To date, none of the terrorists have been brought to justice. In fact, in the months following the attack, the Tunisian Government blocked the FBI from interviewing the only known detained suspect in the attack, a Tunisian man named Ali Harzi. The FBI team has been there for 5 weeks, and they will not make him available. Since January 2011, the U.S. has given more than $320 million in taxpayer dollars to Tunisia. I rise to ask that all U.S. aid to Tunisia be immediately cut off, in light of the country's blocking the FBI's attempt to investigate the attack and interview Harzi. Why are we giving any sort of aid to a country that has proven at this time it is no friend or ally of the United States? Why are we not doing everything in our power to investigate the events in Benghazi that killed four Americans? Should Secretary Clinton fail to cut off aid to Tunisia, I will take legislative action to cut off the aid.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced a resolution to establish a House Select Committee on the Terrorist Attack in Benghazi to ensure a unified investigation of the attack and the Obama Administration's response. A select committee is essential to combine the myriad existing investigations into a single, comprehensive and exhaustive review. I believe such a combined effort will yield even more information regarding the true nature of these terrorist attacks and the administration's response. More than 80 days have passed since the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate and annex that occurred during the late evening and early morning hours of September 11-12. The attack took the lives of four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador--the first ambassador to be killed in the line of duty since 1979. Yet the American people still have been told little about the timeline of this attack and the administration's response in the hours, days and weeks following. The American people still haven't been provided answers to serious questions. For example, why was additional security denied to the ambassador? What intelligence was known about the threat prior to the attacks? There are also serious questions about links of this terrorist attack to the protests at the U.S. embassies in Cairo, Egypt, Tunis, Tunisia and Sanaa, Yemen that same week--where each American compound was breached by individuals allegedly linked to al Qaeda-affiliated groups. What, if any, were the connections between these incidents and the attack in Benghazi? These questions are too serious--and the consequences too grave--to be brushed aside. There are critical legislative decisions the next Congress will have to make based on the answers of these questions. But more importantly, the American people deserve answers to these questions--including open hearings and an unclassified report. The select committee I am proposing should draw from the existing congressional investigations by including the chairman and ranking member of each committee of jurisdiction--Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, Judiciary, Armed Services and Oversight and Government Reform--as well as five additional Republicans appointed by the Speaker and two additional Democrats appointed by the Minority Leader. I appreciate the support I have received for this resolution from the original cosponsors, as well as the Heritage Foundation. I also submit for the record a recent op-ed that was published on RealClearPolitics.com by former Senator Fred Thompson articulating the benefits of a unified select committee. Senator Thompson has a unique perspective on the need for this committee given his experience as counsel on the Senate select committee on Watergate. Mr. Speaker, we owe it to the families of the victims, and the American people, to fully investigate this terrorist attack. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. [Nov. 28, 2012] Investigating Benghazi: Why We Need a Select Committee (By Fred Thompson) As we fixate on the latest version of Gen. David Petraeus' testimony or the misleading statements of Susan Rice, I suggest that we stop and think about the size of what we are dealing with. The Benghazi tragedy raises questions concerning the protection of our embassies, the performance and capabilities of our military and our intelligence community, as well as the decisions of high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense, the State Department, the White House and possibly the Justice Department. The scope of the questions that involve an array of officials, and sensitive agencies and departments of our government, is unprecedented. The inquiry into what happened and why, along with who is or should be accountable, calls for a focused, responsible effort equal to the seriousness and the complexities the issues. I've seen this rodeo before, both in a constructive manner (Watergate, where I served as a counsel) and a less-than- constructive one (Clinton-era investigations, where I chaired a committee that probed at least one facet of the various scandals). On our present course, the prospects for a relatively short but thorough, credible, bipartisan congressional investigation are not good. The prospects for a disjointed, drawn-out mess, replete with partisan bickering, are much better. It is easy to identify at least eight congressional committees (four in each chamber) with claims of jurisdiction in the Benghazi matter. No committee has jurisdiction over all of it, and several committees have jurisdiction over parts that overlap with the jurisdictions of other committees. Some of the committee hearings will involve classified information and will be conducted behind closed doors. Members of ``Committee A'' will not know what a witness told ``Committee B'' in a closed hearing. Gen. Petraeus' recent appearance on Capitol Hill demonstrates how difficult it can be to get a consistent story when the witness is making multiple appearances before even the same committee. Perhaps not all committees with jurisdiction will have hearings, but if half of them do it will produce competing hearings, with competing staffs and competing press conferences over much of Capitol Hill. It will also take longer than necessary, as government officials shuffle back and forth giving repeat performances. Different committee chairmen and their committees will make different rulings on document production, whether to move for immunity for witnesses who refuse to testify on the basis of the 5th Amendment, and a host of other matters. This is simply not the most efficient and credible way to proceed. And it is less likely to arrive at the truth. The seriousness of the matter calls for something better. It calls for a select committee that is given a specific mandate, a budget and a cut-off date that can be adjusted if it is agreed upon. It needs to be comprised of members of both parties who have been selected by their leadership because of their proven integrity, reputation for fairness, and expertise in a given area. In a matter fraught with political implications, it is especially important that Congress accept its responsibility and minimize partisanship as much as possible. History demonstrates that this goal is much easier to achieve with a handful of selected people than it is with many. Since 1789, when Congress investigated a failed military expedition, select committees have been utilized to serve such important and sensitive functions, and the Benghazi matter should follow in that long tradition, whether by means of a joint committee of both houses of Congress or by either chamber. Most select committees have become historical footnotes. Some, however, are well remembered because of the contribution they made to helping Congress carry out its duties of legislating, overseeing the executive branch and educating the American people as to the operation of their government. Ironically, it is because of the success of these panels that some members of Congress and others oppose the formation of one in this case. They say that forming a select committee for a matter such as Benghazi, where a consulate and four American lives were lost, would attach too much importance to the investigation. They fear that it would be equating it with Watergate. Of course, if the Watergate standard, as they define it, is now the operative standard for the formation of a select committee, then seldom, if ever, will another select committee be formed. Critics of the select committee miss the point on several levels. First of all, if indeed a comparison is to be made, one must look at the seriousness of facts and issues presented concerning Benghazi and compare them with the seriousness of facts and issues presented at the times when other select committees, such as Watergate, were formed. So compare the Watergate burglary with what we have here. Can there be any doubt that Benghazi passes the Watergate test? The wisdom of utilizing a select committee should not just be judged on the outcome of the committee's work; dramatic results are not always achieved or warranted. The select Watergate Committee is a beneficial reference point, not because of the end result of its investigation a year and a half after it was formed, but because of the process Congress utilized to deal with a difficult situation. At that time, we had a Republican president and a Congress controlled by the Democrats. Yet the Senate voted unanimously to form the committee. Democratic leadership appointed Sen. Sam Ervin, reputed to be the chamber's leading constitutional scholar, to chair the committee. The Republican leader appointed Sen. Howard Baker to be the vice chairman and leading member of his party on the committee--a senator who was respected on both sides of the aisle. These men protected the legitimate partisan interests of their respective parties and the path was not always smooth, especially behind closed doors, but they understood that their colleagues, as well as the nation, were depending upon them to be responsible and seek the truth. Authority and accountability were clearly placed on the committee, and its members performed accordingly. Select committees are not perfect creations by any means. A clear narrative is often difficult to produce under any circumstances. However, a select committee is simply much more likely to produce focused and credible results. Soon we will see if the United States Congress is still capable of coming together toward the common goal of getting to the bottom of a very serious matter. Or, are decisions about select committees simply reflective of positions based upon whose ox is in danger of being gored?

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Diann Jacox, the superintendent of the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park, who has announced her decision to retire. Ms. Jacox is retiring from the National Park Service after 35 years of outstanding service to our country. According to the National Park Service, Ms. Jacox began her career as a historian in the Philadelphia regional office. She was later appointed regional cultural compliance coordinator for 32 parks in the mid-Atlantic area where she worked to incorporate historic preservation requirements with the National Park Service design and construction plans. Ms. Jacox also served as the chief historian of Philadelphia's Independence National Historical Park and manager of Washington DC's Mary McLeod Bethune Council House National Historic Site. In 2004, Ms. Jacox became the founding superintendent of Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park in Middletown, Virginia. I had the privilege of working with Ms. Jacox to create Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park in her capacity as founding superintendent. The park would not have been possible without her leadership and steady hand. Last month the park celebrated its 10-year anniversary. I want to commend Diann for her tireless years of service and her dedication to historic preservation. I wish her all the best as she returns to Philadelphia in her retirement.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Lynn Brantley, co-founder, president and CEO of the Capital Area Food Bank, who will retire at the end of the year. Ms. Brantley helped found the Capital Area Food Bank 32 years ago and has worked tirelessly to feed the hungry and serve those in need. The Capital Area Food Bank started as a small operation serving a few thousand people and today is the largest supplier of food to people suffering from hunger in the Washington metro area. I had the privilege of working with Ms. Brantley many times over the years to fight hunger in northern Virginia, including in 2009 when we established Feds Feed Families food drive, a national canned food drive conducted by federal employees around the country that has collected more than 20 million pounds of food. I want to commend Lynn for her leadership in addressing the serious challenge of hunger and I extend my deepest gratitude for her service to our community. I wish her all the best in her future endeavors. I also submit a recent Washington Post article on Ms. Brantley's outstanding career. [From The Washington Post, Nov. 17, 2012] Washington-Area Hunger Seen as Worsening (By Robert McCartney) As she prepares to retire, Lynn Brantley, 70, ought to be satisfied with her standout career as a Washington area do- gooder. Driven by the religious teachings of her Pennsylvania Dutch upbringing, Brantley has worked for 32 years as a key leader feeding the hungry in our region. A co-founder and longtime chief executive of the Capital Area Food Bank, she helped transform a small operation that served a few thousand people into a giant clearinghouse that collects and helps distribute groceries to nearly half a million needy. Despite that success, Brantley remains unsatisfied. She's distressed that after so many years, the extent of hunger in our region is much more widespread than when she began. It used to be that families who relied on charity for food were concentrated in inner-city neighborhoods with entrenched poverty. Now the dependence has spread to numerous lower middle-class neighborhoods in the suburbs. It's a sobering thought for those of us fortunate enough to worry mainly about what the scale will say after we pack away too many mashed potatoes at the Thanksgiving feast. ``I can say now that the problem seems 10 times worse than it did when I started out. It's a terrible way to be leaving, to be thinking that people are worse off than when we began,'' Brantley said in an interview Thursday. ``It's the economy; it's what's happening with the middle class. That's who's coming to our agencies now,'' she said. ``These are people who are maybe working two and three jobs, and can't make ends meet. These are people who've been laid off.'' Brantley was mostly earnest and matter-of-fact as she reflected on her career in an interview in her office at the food bank's brand-new, sprawling warehouse near Catholic University in Northeast. She is stepping down at the end of the year, to be succeeded by Nancy E. Roman, an executive at the UN World Food Programme. Brantley rattled off statistics about hunger and offered sociological analysis of why the problem continues to exist. But her voice cracked and she turned visibly emotional at several points when she recalled the need that she's witnessed. It happened when she described seeing children at an after- school meals program at a low-income housing community in Northeast. ``They sit down and they just use their hands to stuff their mouths, because they don't get an evening meal. People don't realize the conditions and what people are facing,'' Brantley said. As she spoke, trucks at nearby loading docks were delivering fresh produce, canned and dry goods and other food and household items that the food bank buys or receives as donations. Some is ``salvage'' food, in slightly dented containers or with nearing use-by dates. At other docks, trucks carried away the food to 700 nonprofit organizations including food pantries, faith-based groups, churches and community centers. They give away bags or boxes of groceries to the needy in the District, Northern Virginia and suburban Maryland. The modern, 123,000-square-foot facility is quite a contrast with the cramped, leaky warehouse where Brantley and others launched the food bank in 1980 in response to cuts in federal food stamp programs. The operation had two volunteers and used shovels to unload trucks. Brantley became chief executive in 1988. Today the food bank has a staff of 133 and uses forklifts. Brantley was active in the civil rights movement in the 1960s before she got involved in hunger issues as a food stamp outreach coordinator in Prince George's County. Her motivation to help the underprivileged sprang from her roots in York County, Penn. ``I went to a Lutheran parochial school and my grandparents were Quakers, so I was ingrained with a sense of the gospel in terms of where I came from and what I did,'' Brantley said. She said food is ``just a profound, moral right that people should have.'' Although she tried to avoid saying anything overtly political, it was clear she wished the government would take a bigger role in helping the needy. ``This is an important point, and something for people to really remember. Back in the '70s, before the [food stamp] cuts came, hunger had nearly been obliterated in this country,'' Brantley said. ``When the cuts came, we as a country have never rebounded from that.'' Now Brantley is looking forward to moving to a Quaker retirement community in Lewes, Del. She hopes to spend more time with her five grandchildren, and to enjoy her hobbies of bicycling and bird watching. She says she worries about the focus in Washington on cutting spending for domestic programs. ``We're looking at cuts coming down the road. It's going to be hurting the most vulnerable people,'' she said. At least she can comfort herself that she devoted her life's work to softening the blow.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, due to a long-scheduled obligation in northern Virginia this morning, I was unable to be present for the vote on the Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012. I would have voted ``yea'' for this legislation if I was present because the Magnitsky Rule of Law provisions are essential to hold those who violate human rights and freedom of speech accountable. Stated against:

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, on October 13, I attended an event in Leesburg, Virginia dedicating a war memorial to four soldiers who gave their lives in service to their country. The event would not have been possible without the valuable contributions of event organizer Ben Lawrence, Boy Scout Troop 1910 in Lucketts, Virginia, the Parkview High School Band, the 116th Infantry Brigade of the Virginia Army National Guard, the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1177, American Legion Post 34, the Loudoun County Sheriff's office, and Scott Warner, owner of the Downtown Saloon. I have included the full remarks from Colonel John Epperly, commander of the 116th Infantry Brigade, that properly honors the soldiers and Marine honored on the memorial. Colonel Eppersly: Congressman Wolf, General Mills, Admiral Kemp, General Forsythe, Honorable Members of the Virginia Legislature, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, the Leesburg Town Council, Distinguished Guests and most importantly, families of our Fallen Warriors...Good Morning. On Behalf of the Virginia Army National Guard and the 116th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, it is a profound honor to be with you on this crisp autumn morning in Northern Virginia to pay tribute to our brothers in arms. Loudoun County, Leesburg and the surrounding towns and hamlets have provided Warriors for the defense of the Commonwealth and Nation since the dawn of our Republic. My own regiment was formed not far from here in 1742 to defend what was then the frontier of the Americas. Since then, men and women from towns like Leesburg, Reston, Purcellville, Sterling, Lovettsville and many more have served in every battle and campaign our nation has fought in. Our generation is no different and today we gather to honor the sacrifice of four extraordinary men who gave the last full measure of devotion in defense of our nation. I'd like to take a moment to introduce you to these men of uncommon valor. Army Sergeant Scott L. Kirkpatrick fell while serving with the 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment in the 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division. Sergeant Kirkpatrick and his fire team were assaulting a sniper position in Arab Jabour, Iraq when he was lost. Scott was doing what Infantry NCOs do best. He was leading his men from the front in one of the most dangerous places in Iraq. But who was he? Well Sergeant Kirkpatrick was many things. He was a poet, a writer and a leader of men. Indeed, Sergeant Kirkpatrick was a Renaissance Man who felt strongly that his country needed him after the 9-11 attacks. When he fell, he was on his second combat tour in Iraq and he had already become what many aspire to be in this life. Sergeant Kirkpatrick, the Warrior Poet, had earned the undying respect of his fellow warriors, the gratitude of his community and the love of his family. Today we honor a life well lived. Sergeant Kirkpatrick's decorations include the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart and the Combat Infantryman's Badge. Army Specialist Stephan L. Mace fell while serving with the 3rd Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment in the 4th Brigade Combat Team of the 4th Infantry Division. Specialist Mace and his platoon were fighting a savage defensive action to hold Combat Outpost Bostick in Kamdesh, Afghanistan when he was lost. Stephan's outpost was attacked by over 200 Taliban fighters and his unit was seriously outnumbered in what would be one of the fiercest actions of the Afghan Campaign. According to his company commander, Specialist Mace fought valiantly from an exposed position with no regard for his own life. Stephan would earn the Bronze Star for gallantry in action that day. Who was this gallant Virginian? Stephan was a multi-sport athlete. He played Football, Basketball, Baseball and he loved Motor-Cross racing. He was a history buff and no doubt had an acute understanding of his difficult mission in the mountains of Afghanistan. Today we honor his courage in a land so far from his Virginia home. Specialist Mace's decorations include the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart and the Combat Action Badge. Army Specialist Douglas J. Green fell while serving with the 3rd Battalion, 21st Infantry Regiment in the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division. Specialist Green and his platoon were engaged by Taliban forces with small arms fire and IEDs in Sperwan Ghar of Afghanistan's Kandahar Province when he was lost. Specialist Green was on his second combat tour, with his first being in Iraq. In the cold and rugged mountains of Afghanistan, Doug was known for his warmth and the gift of bringing humor and hope to his brother infantrymen even in the toughest of times. Doug was one of those truly inspirational people who could raise the spirits and fortunes of others through the strength of his personality and positive attitude. He is remembered for his selflessness and care for others. Indeed, while stationed in Alaska he volunteered many hours of his time with Big Brothers and Big Sisters. There can be no doubt that his selflessness and courage were on full display in Kandahar as well. Today we honor a hero with a unique gift to lift the spirits of those around him regardless of the circumstances. Specialist Green's decorations include the Bronze Star with V Device for Valor, the Purple Heart and the Combat Infantryman's Badge. Marine Captain Michael M. Quin fell while serving with Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron 469 of the 3rd Marine Air Wing. Captain Quin, a UH-1 Yankee Pilot was flying a combat training mission in Yuma, Arizona one month prior to an upcoming deployment to Afghanistan when he was lost in a helicopter crash. Captain Quin was a 2006 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. His loss reminds us of the risks our warriors take in training before they reach the combat zones they are destined for. Captain Quin lived life with a zest few can muster. He was a notable athlete playing soccer as well as track and field. His was also a life of service rarely seen. Michael became an Eagle Scout with Troop 29 and the Gazebo he built for his Eagle Project still stands today at Arndt's Lutheran Church. Mike was proud to be a U.S. Marine and wear the Gold Wings of a Marine Aviator. This morning we honor a gallant life of service from one of our Nations's best and brightest. Captain Quin's awards include the Navy Marine Corps Achievement Medal and the Global War on Terror Service Medal. These four exceptional American warriors and patriots remind us that it isn't how long we live, but how we live. With this monument, we commit the valor of these four men to immortality. Fifty or a hundred years from now on another cool October morning, people will stop and read the names of: Sergeant Scott Kirkpatrick Specialist Stephan Mace Specialist Douglas Green Captain Michael Quin And their Legend will live on . . . Thank You and God Bless America.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record the preliminary observations of a Robert F. Kennedy Center Delegation to Moroccan- controlled Western Sahara and the Sahrawi refugee camps in Algeria. The executive summary paints a bleak human rights picture. Too often the government of Morocco is held up as a regional model for human rights and tolerance. But this report, among others, including a September 17 Reuters story which reported that, ``Last week, a network of 18 Moroccan human rights organizations said rights have declined despite the adoption of a new charter proposed by the ruling monarchy last year at the height of street protests,'' once again call that reputation into question. Robert F. Kennedy Center Delegation to Moroccan-Controlled Western Sahara and Sahrawi Refugee Camps in Algeria--Summary of Preliminary Observations On Friday, August 31, 2012 an international delegation of the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights (RFK Center) concluded a visit to evaluate the human rights situation in Moroccan-controlled Western Sahara and the Sahrawi refugee camps near Tindouf, Algeria. The RFK Center delegation met with victims of human rights violations, a broad range of representatives of civil society, representatives of the international community, and government officials. The delegation also noticed that the conflict stalemate has a serious impact on the rights of the Sahrawi population in both Moroccan-controlled Western Sahara and refugee camps.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the record several months' worth of correspondence with the State Department regarding Vietnam's deplorable human rights and religious freedom record. The correspondence includes a recent letter signed by three other members and myself calling for the removal of David Shear, U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam, for his failure to advocate for basic human rights and religious freedom in Vietnam while conditions are getting worse. The U.S. must ensure that human rights and religious freedom are at the forefront of bilateral relations with Vietnam and the American embassy must be an island of freedom. Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, May 15, 2012. Hon. David Shear, U.S. Ambassador to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, U.S. Department of State, C Street, NW, Wasington, DC. Dear Ambassador Shear: We write today to express our concern over the arrest and detention of a U.S. citizen, Dr. Nguyen Quoc Quan, by Vietnamese authorities on April 17, 2012. Further, we write to express our concern that you, as U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam, have not yet visited the U.S. citizen and democracy activist, who has been imprisoned for nearly one month on politically motivated charges. During a hearing convened by the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission today, Dr. Nguyen's wife, Mrs. Mai Huong Ngo, provided emotional testimony about her husband's ongoing detention. It was shocking to hear that no one from the U.S. Embassy has reached out to Mrs. Ngo regarding the detention of her husband. We urge you to personally contact both Dr. Nguyen and Mrs. Ngo to show solidarity with and concern for two American citizens. In addition, if Mrs. Ngo decides to go to Vietnam and attempt to see her husband, we request that you ensure her safety by personally meeting her at the airport and escorting her to the embassy and the jail where Dr. Nguyen is being held so that she does not meet the same fate as her husband. If the U.S. Embassy does not stand with Dr. Nguyen Quoc Quan then what assurances do other U.S. citizens have when traveling to authoritarian countries? America must be a voice for the voiceless. The U.S. Embassy in Vietnam must be an island of freedom. We urge you to meet with Dr. Nguyen and work to secure his immediate release so he can be reunited with his wife and two sons. To speak with Mrs. Ngo, please contact Representative Wolf's office at 202-225-5136 for her information. We would like to be kept abreast of this case and look forward to your response. Sincerely, Frank R. Wolf. Daniel E. Lungren. Loretta Sanchez. Zoe Lofgren. Bob Filner.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit insightful and compelling testimony given by Dr. Qanta A. A. Ahmed before the House Homeland Security Committee last month. I commend Chairman Peter King for continuing this series of hearings looking at the challenge of radicalization in the U.S. and how it impacts the American Muslim community. I urge all of my colleagues to read Dr. Ahmed's testimony, especially given her first-hand experience with radicalized youth in Pakistan and her recent series of columns and editorials on the threat of radicalization in the West. The American Muslim Response to Hearings on Radicalization within their Community--Congressional Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, Washington DC, June 20th 2012 Qanta A. A. Ahmed MD, FACP, FCCP, FAASM, Associate Professor of Medicine, The State University of New York, USA Good morning. Thank you Chairman King and Ranking Committee Member Congressman Thompson and distinguished members of the Committee for the opportunity to testify today on such an important issue. My Muslim identity I am a British citizen, and a Permanent Resident in these United States where I have made my home for fourteen years. I am a practicing physician and a practicing Muslim. Religion stems from the etymological Latin root relegere, meaning to be gathered or bound together. An individual's narrative of his or her religious experience is often a catalogue of relationships and my Islam is no different, beginning with the gift of Islam from my parents. There is no divide between any of my multiple roles as I have learned following the example of my parents, both of whom remain true to their faith without encroaching upon the public space yet always espousing pluralism and tolerance. They raised me to observe Islam in the same manner. I pray, I fast during Ramadan, I find worship in my work and I have also completed the Hajj--the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. Each year I am fortunate to be able to exceed the Islamic duties of charity required of me annually. My parents support my views which I express here in this chamber today and all of my actions which have led me to this moment. As a family, for generations, we have explicitly repudiated all forms of violence--including those conducted in the name of Islam--long before the specter of radical Islamism ever blighted these United States. My Vantage as an Internationally Experienced Muslim Physician In my 21 years since qualification, I have practiced on three continents; here in the Americas in the United States-- in both South Carolina and New York, in Europe, chiefly in London, and in Asia, namely when I practiced medicine for two years, from November 1999 to November 2001 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This peripatetic path has allowed me to engage intimately with Saudi Muslims as I attended them in their critical illnesses, and later work for many years to improving their public health and that for all Muslim pilgrims to Mecca; and with British Diaspora Muslims as I attended them in Britain's capital. I functioned in these roles as a treating physician, a physician-educator, a physician colleague, a mentor to training doctors. My work has led to numerous publications both in the medical academe and the mainstream media. For over a decade, I have also been invited to teach and speak at numerous conferences in the Muslim Majority world including for the Saudi Arabian National Guard Health Affairs, for the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Health, for the US Consulate in Jeddah, for the Saudi Arabian Soccer Federation, the American University of Sharjah and other settings. I have also been asked to visit hospitals and meet physician colleagues in Pakistan. Most recently in November 2011, as a visiting professor I was invited by FIFA to the first meetings evaluating impacts of Ramadan on the elite Muslim footballer convening in both Doha, Qatar and in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. I have therefore lived among, met, treated, taught, worked with, published with, researched with, befriended and, on occasion, been repudiated and abandoned, by many Muslims in many dimensions. My Experience of the burden of Radical Islamism on my American Patients Currently, my work as an attending sleep disorders specialist involves personally attending to the World Trade Center First Responder patient population of Nassau County at Winthrop University Hospital. Our hospital provides state-of- the-art care to 2500 of these Americans without financial burden each year through the provenance of the Zadroga Bill, spearheaded by Chairman King and his colleagues. Hence patients in my personal practice today include multiple members of US law enforcement including active duty, disabled and former NYPD, active duty FBI agents, active, disabled and retired FDNY, former members of the New York Federal Crime Bureau and others who are officially designated as World Trade Center First Responders--6000 of the nation's 40,000 first responders live on Long Island. Many of these patients have roles in counter terrorism task forces today. I treat these men and women for sleep-related complications developed as a result of their service to our nation including obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression and other conditions. Attending them gives me special insights into the indiscriminate burden of radical Islamist acts born by our community a decade after they assaulted humanity in my adoptive home, New York City, an assault I witnessed from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Understanding the work and the suffering of my patients and the toll it takes on them makes clear to me the enormous sacrifice they and their families make to safeguard us at times of crisis and in between, a sacrifice much of the nation has forgotten, or remains unaware of. As a Muslim meeting these Americans reveals the devastating impact of radical Islamism to which few others--Muslims or non-Muslim-- will ever be privy. My experience with Contemporary Radical Islamist Ideology In Spring 2010, in recognition of my academic work on Hajj Medicine and health diplomacy, I was selected as the first Muslim woman to complete a Templeton Cambridge Journalism Fellowship in Science and Religion at the University of Cambridge in England. Following a meeting with an internationally recognized expert in counterterrorism, I reviewed data exposing me to the brutality of contemporary radical Islamists and decided to focus my fellowship on the psychological manipulation of Islam into the service of terror. I thus specifically evaluated the mechanisms of martyrdom and jihadist ideology as expressed by contemporary radical Islamists. This work both informed my specific knowledge and the many publications I have authored since. My experience of being a Templeton Cambridge Fellow adds special academic context useful to me in interpreting the salient findings of this series of investigative hearings. As a result of my work at Cambridge, I have met with some of the leading minds approaching counter terrorism studies. One such meeting with one Pakistani neuropsychologist piqued my interest sufficiently to travel to the North West frontier Province of Pakistan (now renamed KPK) in March 2012 to visit Malakand, now secured by the Pakistani military. There, I spent three days at `Sabaoon', the Pakistani school founded by civilians to deprogram child militant operatives engaged in militancy with the Pakistani Taliban. There I treated local villagers and traveled to nearby Mingora to see rehabilitated child militants readjusting to community life after successful deprogramming. At Sabaoon, I met with doctors, teachers, psychotherapists, military leaders and the child militant rehabilitees themselves all boys aged between 10 and 20. I was also invited to attend the relatives of these boys for a one day traveling clinic to provide basic medical care during which I met, interviewed, examined and treated the mothers, sisters, grandmothers, siblings, children and spouses of convicted militant operatives, suicide operation `martyrs' and suspects currently in detention in Saudi Arabia. I recorded many photographs of my visit which I can share in a classified forum if the Committee determines there is a need. During the visit, though I was not granted clearance to question the students directly, under supervision of my fellow physician colleagues and with the Pakistani Rangers nearby, I was allowed to meet with one 15-year old Pakistani boy in particular. I listened to him for about an hour as he described his transition from a school boy of 13 walking to school, his seduction by an older boy with tales of a `purer', `more legitimate' Islam--that of the Taliban's--his voluntary decision to run away and join a network of Taliban militants, his deliberate and very labyrinthine confinements in hiding centers called `markaz' (centers), his handlers' persistent and successful maneuvering defeating the dedicated efforts of his parents to retrieve him, his training and preparation which he chillingly termed `Tarbiyyat' which means `religious education' (consisting of advanced training in the use of a handgun, the deployment of a grenade and the successful detonation of a suicide jacket) and, finally, his ultimate surrender to a police officer in the designated target of attack--a nearby mosque. I have in my possession his de-identified narrative which can be reviewed in a classified forum but as is not available for disclosure in this public record. This young boy's naivete, his isolated and distorted world view, his lack of knowledge of Bin Laden or 9-11 and his indoctrination all revealed to me that Islamist ideologies are active, alive and moving ahead far beyond the reach of 20th Century Al-Qaedah ideology. Further, his halting and unconfident Urdu reminded me much of the nascent transition from boyhood to manhood of my own brothers when they were younger, who fortunately have been sheltered from such manipulations by opportunities our family could give them because we are so attached to our native Britain and Islam, not Islamism. Further, the young boy also revealed his Islamist- indoctrinated hatred of certain sects of Muslims, including Shias who are a minority in Pakistan, his belief that anyone collaborating with a western-dressed individual was an enemy of Islam--including Pakistani troops who are usually dressed in western trousers--and that any who engaged with US troops was also an enemy to Islam. Exactly these ideologies are being promoted in the United States today, often through portals--whether via internet portals, recurrent migration to Somalia, Sudan, Pakistan, Yemen or other locations, circulated videos, or pockets of extremism in numerous centers of gatherings including mosques and this series of investigative hearings have revealed that. The essential construct is the same--separation, supremacy and unquestioning acceptance of nihilistic ambitions-- including the deployment of brutally violent measures--all of which collude to eradicate any other diversity. Since 2009, I have authored dozens of Opinion columns and Editorials published in the mainstream American, British, Dutch, Israeli and Pakistani press examining the politics and theology of radical contemporary Islamist ideologies. Unsurprisingly, I have learned the consequences of opining in the free press. I have been subject to personal attack and abuse online. In my journalistic activities I also have learned how difficult it is for American newspaper editors, American network television producers and American media bookers to approach either solicited or unsolicited opinion pieces or television interviews concerning issues pertaining to Islam. There has been a distinct chill in the public discourse including here in the United States which is driven by the rising cries of Islamophobia, the advancing grip of Islamist claims of defamation of Islam which they advance through Islamist Lawfare, the internationalization without protest of Blasphemy laws and the general fear of political `incorrectness' which leads to an enormous loss of counter- arguments in the debate about Islamism and its distinctions from Islam. The reaction to the Hearings in the Muslim community My community begins with my family who not only supports these hearings but have welcomed them. We have a large family thriving in the United States from coast to coast, settled in this country since the 1960s. One of my family members, my cousin, has served in the United States Navy. Earlier than that, some of my maternal Uncles trained and studied in 1950s America as invited scholars. Many of us are American citizens. We are also very well acquainted with the abuses and discrimination that pass for `official Islam' as expressed in Islamist Pakistan and are extremely aware of the hazards of empowering those who espouse a supremacist ideology born of Islamism but masquerading as Islam. To my surprise not a single member of my family discouraged me from participating in these investigative hearings even though they remain aware of the risks this can pose to me in my every day life. I also have a vibrant Muslim readership among my almost 100,000 readers of my book, who communicate with me through social network platforms, letters and emails or respond on line to articles I have authored in almost every major mainstream publication in the United States. Many of my self- identifying Muslim readers express fear that the investigative hearings will misrepresent Islam and fuel Islamophobia while also expressing excitement that this discussion is entering the public space in such an auspicious arena. Their sentiment about the investigative hearings revolve more around the scrutiny of activities of some Muslim Americans rather than the actual findings of the investigative hearings which few of them could cite. For my support of these investigative hearings and for my writings sympathetic to the concerns of these investigative hearings I have also been subject to intimidation on Twitter often from self-identifying Muslims who clearly denounce these hearings. Their abusive hostility is largely centered on the claim that my views supportive of these investigative hearings as unrepresentative of Muslim Americans. On a professional level many of my former academic Muslim colleagues now eschew contact with me as my political voice has become more widely heard, some because of the personal affront it causes them and others because they are beholden to theocractic Muslim states and now see their relationship with me as a risk. It is significant that only one member of my circle of academic Muslim colleagues in the Middle East wrote to me with encouragement. They see my support of America in general as `collusion'. A recent publication on Huffington Post is more encouraging of the Muslim American reaction. In it I wrote about my Evolution as an Anti Islamist Muslim and I found it generated an overwhelming response many of them very positive from self identified Muslims who commented my views to be ahead of the public awareness and supported my endeavors and views including my call for the exposure of the imposter of Islamism to be distinguished from Islam. It is however important to add that as an Anti-Islamist Muslim my community IS America, as Islam demands it, not an enclave within America, but the entire nation. These investigative hearings while entitled to examine the reaction of American Muslims within their communities might be better expressed as our reaction within America because this is what Islam teaches us--that we must collaborate, cooperative, enhance and contribute to the community surrounding us, and not remain in insular, disengaged groups which engender and then empower silos of disconnection and disaffection. Unfortunately the reaction in wider America to these investigative hearings has been initial vilification and later disdain as manifested by the extraordinary disinterest of the mainstream media in the hard findings of these hearings. This uninformed response has not been redirected by informed motivated media coverage despite the opportunity to redress the balance, revealing the wider media may itself have some discomfort denouncing Islamism. How I interpret the findings of the hearings These investigative hearings reveal radicalization is ongoing in multiple sectors right here in the United States, in our civilian community, in our military community and in our prison community. Muslims in America can be radicalized despite the best efforts of their parents or mentors. We also have learned radicalization in America is usually facilitated by handlers and Islamist seducers who operate on multiple planes using multiple forms of media and are facile at identifying or exploiting the vulnerable. This is exactly how Pakistani Taliban Islamists operate in Pakistan and elsewhere based on what I have seen in person and my extensive reading of, and meetings with, counter terrorism experts. We cannot ignore the domestic risks here and threat both to our national security, and by extrapolation, to international security. I cite a few examples revealed by these investigative hearings: On December 7th 2011, Daris Long, father of a son murdered by radical Islamists testified ``the political correctness exhibited by the government over offending anyone in admitting the truth about Islamist extremism masked alarm bells that were going off. Warnings were ignored, Major Nidal Hassan was able to openly praise the Little Rock shootings in front of fellow army officers and then commit his own jihad''. This is consistent with the shortcomings of language and the paralysis of political correctness that I identify as one of the barriers to examining radical Islamism in the United States. On March 12th, 2011, Melvin Bledsoe testified that his son Abdul Hakim Muhammad was `brainwashed' by Nashville Muslims leading to his terrorist training in Yemen to return to murder one soldier and injure another at a US military recruitment center. This confirms the same forces seducing a Pakistani schoolboy in the SWAT are at work in the American heartland. On July 27th 2011, Ahmed Hussen, President of the Canadian Somali Congress recognized our vulnerability in this ideological battle of Islamism with Islam and Islamism's exploitation of victimhood `There has not been a parallel attempt to counter the toxic anti Western narrative that creates a culture of victimhood in the minds of members of our community.' This confirms the utility to Islamists of cultivating a manufactured sense of victimhood among vulnerable Muslims. My motivation to enter the public discourse: to combat Islamism In the years since 9-11, every Muslim has been compelled to confront his or her identity. This has been a direct function of the martyrdom terrorism acts of 9-11. Since then, the lay audience and much of expert opinion has been unable to separate Islamism from Islam. Today this is our greatest challenge. Distinguishing Islam and Islamism requires nuance and care, which few in the media are prepared to provide or even qualified to identify. Some, while well intentioned but deeply uninformed, retaliate against the sound intelligence and counter measures that must be taken, including mechanisms such as these investigative hearings, and instead unwittingly collude with the non violent manifestations of the Islamists which have long since evolved to new elements masquerading as the `peaceful' translators and `owners' of Islam. I am here to tell you non-violent Islamists are not the owners of Islam nor is their intent peaceful. I was in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia when the Towers fell. Within hours, I discovered my sentiments of loss and sorrow were not widely shared, either by Saudi physician colleagues or by fellow non Saudi Muslim expatriate workers, many of whom had been trained by Americans in New York City like myself or other cities in the United States--some of us even shared the same professors of medicine. This discovery came as a terrible shock to my naiveties at the time and I was patronizingly ridiculed for being so `pro- American'. I realized the version of Islam my parents had given, and our reverence for the nations who had sheltered and reared me--Britain and the United States--wasn't widely accepted. That fellow physicians, as highly trained and as privileged as I, could be elated at the loss of life and the transient bowing of America's spirit utterly displaced me to a new, harsher reality. In the wake of 9-11, I saw Osama bin Laden feted as a hero in Pakistan, nation of my matrilineal and patrilineal heritage. On one trip I recall a Pakistani driver in Karachi explaining to me why 7 years after 9-11, Pakistani families were still naming their newborns Osama in his honor. He was still deified, recognized by many as a `defender' of Islam, a `warrior savior'. Nothing could be more offensive to my beliefs as a Muslim or my principles as a human being. This was extraordinarily difficult to reconcile with the knowledge that Islam condemns all murder, and particularly the execution of non-combatant civilians in any setting. In my mind Bin Laden and his sympathizers had renounced Islam by their acts and represented nothing more than violent terrorists and those who named their firstborns after Osama were lionizing nothing more than a mass murderer. Soon after my return from Saudi Arabia, I began to record my experiences in a manuscript that would become my first book, In the Land of Invisible Women now in its 10th edition and published in 13 countries including Muslim majority Senegal, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan and Mauritius. Realizing I would be representing two versions of Islam--mine, and that espoused by the theocracy of Saudi Arabia--I needed to broaden my reading around key areas. It was in my reading that I discovered the political ideology termed Islamism, and the many strains of contemporary radical Islamism, both violent and non-violent. I learned unlike my own experience, many Muslims struggled with a pervasive sense of inferiority, influencing their beliefs, sense of justice and identities leading to deep and rather novel resentments. The fascist supremacy of Islamist ideologues was therefore a predictably appealing, if very frightening development, which was completely alien to the Islam I knew. Over this decade the Islamist voice has become increasingly prominent both in the United States and globally--whether in advancing the intrusion of the ritual symbolism of Islam into the public space--for instance the battle for the niqab in the public arena in France, the demands for the veil to be permitted in FIFA soccer tournaments, or the most recent debacle involving the vilification of the NYPD for their counter terrorism efforts drawing false accusations of Muslim profiling. Throughout the world, including in the United States, the Islamists' goal is one and the same: to stoke the fires of unwitting Muslims into believing in their own manufactured sense of victimhood as a means to exploit both the uninformed Muslim and often times the liberal democracies where we make our homes. It is this last fallacy, of collective victimhood, that most fuels my drive to expose Islamism for what it is--a weak yet vicious imposter for a great religion, an imposter which seeks to exploit and devour both Muslims and non Muslims alike in its pursuit for power and dominance. These forces are at work as we testify now in this room at this hearing--an effort by three Muslims which will predictably be derisively labeled as a collaboration in our own persecution. I am here to testify that nothing could be further from reality. Civil liberties of Muslims are not at stake Many critics of these investigative hearings (both Muslim and not) charge them with a threat to Muslims' civil liberties in America. My most vociferous opponents, referring to Muslims' American civil liberties, state: `give away your freedoms not mine' (an American Muslim); `This is not 1910 America and what happened to the Jews--Jews have only just stopped walking on eggshells in America. Watching what's happening to Muslims makes me sick' (an American Jew); `We need a Rosa Parks to stand up for Muslim rights' (a non Muslim American); `Park 51 shows Muslims do not have civil rights'; `some want Lower Manhattan to be `An American Jerusalem' (a non Muslim American). They identify my support of these investigative hearings as my collusion in the fictional erosion of Muslim civil liberties. While I respect the fears which birth these concerns, I can firmly strip them aside. Muslims in America do not have the painful history of African Americans or of Jewish Americans. Our privileges as Muslim Americans today have been guaranteed in part by the struggles of the Civil Rights era and by the travails of the Jewish Americans before us. We do not, in any extrapolation, face similar disadvantages as earlier American history reveals. To claim such is a gross distortion of history and demographic data in the United States proves this. I would also add I denounce the above assertions of an equivalency between the sufferings of other minority populations in America and that of Muslim Americans with some authority. I understand all about being a Muslim woman without civil rights as predicated by my two years living under Wahabi theocracy without any civil or human rights including those Islam bequeathed me 1500 years ago. I also understand the total extinction of civil rights on minorities--both Muslim and non Muslim--as experienced in Islamist Pakistan as described to me by Christians, Ahmadi Muslims and Zoroastrians during my last visit to Pakistan and in my extensive contact with minorities. I have lived the impact of the Islamist narrative both in Saudi Arabia, during my extensive travels in Pakistan and in my years treating Americans in New York as well as when examining the lives of my orthodox Bengali British migrants in East London or training some of the very neo-orthodox Muslim doctors of that area. Muslims are not victimized by The Homeland Security Committee's investigations As you learn of my biography, know that I am part of an economically powerful American demographic. According to Pew Forum data Muslims are mainstream and mostly middle class. I am rather representative. Like me, 65% of Muslims in America are first generation and 18% of us have South Asian heritage. The majority of foreign- born Muslim Americans arrived, like me, in the 1990s--50% of us have moved here for economic or educational opportunity--I did so for both reasons. 46% of us are, like me, women, and around 31% are my age--between 40 and 54. We are a multiracial multiethnic group with over 68 different nationalities before becoming American. Our income and education reflects the US public and 16% of us earn more than $100,000 annually compared to 17% of the general US public who do the same--a 1% disparity. In my native Britain, the income disparity for those Muslims who earn over 40,000 sterling annually is more than 10%. Equivalent incomes earned in France comparing between Muslim and average public show even greater disparity of 12%, in Germany 14% in Spain 19%. Muslims in America have achieved more, faster, and more often, in America than in any other Muslim Diaspora setting. My experience is very much the mainstream Muslim American experience. I ask the committee to recognize that most Muslims are not mistreated by efforts to protect our integrity as Americans though they are certainly entitled to be offended at these efforts and America guarantees their right to be offended. The offence claimed by many Muslim Americans whether at the first hearing in this series or for instance pertaining to the NYPD's activities more recently, is misplaced. Instead of denouncing methods of intelligence gathering, Muslims in America should be denouncing the findings of those intelligence missions: the active Islamists among us. The furore has been misdirected, much to the benefit of committed Islamists at work within this nation's borders. Why is it so hard to discuss the Islamist threat to the United States of America? There are serious shortcomings of language in engaging in this particular discourse. In the post 9-11 era there has been a gravitation towards extreme speech and a pervasive lack of integrative complexity in public speech as shown by critically important research performed at the University of Cambridge among others. Such lack of nuance is very well exploited by the cultivating Islamist. The arrival of a sense of `otherization' of Muslims into the public lens has facilitated the grip of Islamist Lawfare on the public dialogue--fueling both the victimhood of Muslims and the outcries of the offended liberal. The false claims and crocodile tears of Islamophobia and the encroaching advancement of the idea of defamation of religion which is pushed by the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) elsewhere, here in America intimidates journalists, news media and others from engaging in dialogue who may face spurious lawsuits if they dare engage in this dialogue. These profound problems with language have extended to the US government decree banning enforcement agencies from discussing the very threats we have heard at this series of hearings, banning the word 'Islamist' for instance. This sanitization of our lexicon reveals a shocking and perhaps specious reluctance to engage with the problem or worse, a foolhardy embrace, unintentional or otherwise, with the Islamist stance. In Conclusion Islam is nothing if not justice. Any injustice committed or pursued in the name of Islam is anathema to the believing Muslim and counter to the ideal which is Islam, yet Islamists demand unjust abominations--foundational to their beliefs--of their subscribers. Muslims must remember their duties, not only to themselves, or their Maker, but also to their society wherever they find themselves. Unlike Islamism which mandates it, Islam reviles claims to supremacy, instead appealing for humility. The Prophet Mohammed (SAW) himself admonished his followers not to make claims of supremacy over Moses, or indeed any other messenger of God. The Qur'an repeatedly reminds the Muslim that `to each is sent a Law and a Way' and to each they must `judge themselves by their Law and their Way'. Islamist Muslims overlook this and many other principles of Islam. Our role as believers is to cooperate and collaborate and enhance the world, not to oppress, discriminate, exclude or murder others. Major Muslim majority nations under the guise of democracy--foremost Pakistan--are operating as Islamist Supremacists who legally persecute Muslim and non-Muslim minorities to extinction with impunity. These are not the ways of Muslims. These are the ways of fascists. We must redirect media interpretation and expose their bias and painful lack of contextual perspective while commending the efforts of these investigative hearings in anticipation of future hearings which will surely assess progress, intervention and outcome data of measures enacted since. We also cannot examine the radical Islamist threat in the United States in a domestic vacuum. This is a transnational, cross-continental issue mandating an international response. While we have been pursuing conventional international warfare and in fact have assassinated the leader of Al Qaedah for instance, we have remained dangerously vulnerable because of our delayed realization of the political science aspects of Islamist ideology and the very serious threat this poses to our democracy. These are vulnerabilities which cannot be safeguarded by drones, or gunships but instead must be secured by counter ideological warfare which begins here, by widening the debate, discussion and scholarship in this arena. There is an overwhelming need for focused examination of the interface of Islam and Islamism. These investigative hearings provide the first public foray examining this divide in real-time as expressed in contemporary America. Until these questions are asked, and later answered, until more American Muslims confront the discomfort of disarticulation from their unquestioning brotherhood with the `Ummah' and its worst elements, the shifts between Islam, Islamism and the West, between puritanical Islamists masquerading as Muslims and true moderate non Islamist Muslims, will continue to be tectonic and devastating. In my position of privilege and opportunity, one shared with many Muslims in America, if I do not oppose Islamism, I am failing in my Muslim duty to American society and in failing American society, I profoundly fail as a Muslim. I am reminded of a saying attributed to the Prophet Mohammed by one of his companions who recounted it to an early believer: ``Whoever sees a wrong and is able to put it right with his hand, let him do so; if he can't, then with his tongue, if he can't, then with his heart. That is the bare minimum of faith'. This, having both hand, tongue, and heart, I am committed to live by and therefore I thank you Chairman King, Ranking Committee Member Congressman Thompson and the distinguished members of the Committee on Homeland Security for enabling me to fulfill the bare minimum of my belief today.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, Monday marked the anniversary of South Sudan's independence. The people of that war-weary nation voted overwhelmingly to break from Khartoum which is headed by an indicted war criminal. The challenges facing this fledgling nation are sizeable, including government corruption. A June AP story reported on President Salva Kiir's efforts to secure the return of an estimated $4 billion in stolen funds. Kiir wrote, ``We fought for freedom, justice and equality . . . Yet, once we got to power, we forgot what we fought for and began to enrich ourselves at the expense of our people.'' These are sobering but necessary words. South Sudan's transition to independence has been undermined by their murderous neighbor to the north--Bashir. He's driven thousands of refugees from the Nuba Mountains into South Sudan. And the Obama administration has done little to thwart him. We must stand with our friends in the South as they seek to establish a healthy democracy and we must bring Bashir to justice.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize LINK, which celebrates 40 years serving the Herndon, Sterling and Ashburn communities in northern Virginia this month. LINK began as a number of congregations came together to start a food pantry for those in need. Today, LINK is comprised of a strong group of churches from different backgrounds and partners with local businesses, schools and individuals efforts to serve the emergency food needs in our community. In 2011, LINK utilized over a thousand volunteers to serve over 2,700 families with food, clothing and toys for children. LINK has also been working with public schools in Fairfax County to distribute unused cafeteria food to families in need. I have had the privilege of working with LINK, and its excellent leadership and volunteers, many times over the years. It is a wonderful organization and I extend my sincere appreciation and deepest gratitude to the volunteers for their many years of hard work to address the serious challenge of hunger in our community. I submit the following article from the Herndon Patch honoring LINK's 40 years of service. [From Herndon Patch, June 22, 2012] LINK Celebrates 40 Years Serving the Community (By Leslie Perales) This July LINK Against Hunger will celebrate 40 years serving the Herndon, Sterling and Ashburn area communities. The organization began with a number of congregations combining their efforts to start a food pantry for those in need. Though it's grown and changed over the years, LINK's mission is the same: Christians linking their neighbors to food and financial assistance. The entire LINK organization is run by volunteers. Patch sat down with three of LINK's volunteers that have spent many years serving their neighbors through the organization. Bob Ashdown has been volunteering with the organization for about 35 years and is the food pantry manager. He picks up donations from area bakeries, grocery stores, farmers markets and even schools, and oversees the pantry. Jim Butts is the website manager for LINK and has volunteered with the organization since before it existed. He did much of the organization's paperwork on a daily basis for a time, and helped work with the furniture mission when LINK operated one. LINK President Lisa Lombardozzi has been working with the organization for about 15 years, beginning when she began staying home with her children. She began as a food coordinator, then worked with the food basket program. Lombardozzi said the biggest change she's seen in her years with LINK is more involvement from the community, and how the church demographics have changed. She said with so many area organizations that people can volunteer with, LINK has to fight a little more to stay on people's radars, but at the same time they have been able to expand and respond to the increased need in the community. Ashdown said in the past few years, during the recession, the community has become more aware of the need and responds very well. Social networking has had a big impact on community response, he said. When LINK was running low on food for its holiday basket program, volunteers sent out a message on Facebook and people shared the message and responded to the need, Ashdown said. He said the holiday basket program used to have three to four dedicated volunteers packing food over two to three weeks, but now more than 40 volunteers will come take shifts to pack the baskets. Butts said he's seen the organization start with a food mission, add a furniture and bed mission, then eventually phase it out again. They also had a clothing mission, which eventually combined with and became The Closet, located in downtown Herndon. LINK is unique in that it's the only organization that brings the food to its clients instead of having clients come to the pantry, Butts said. When someone in need contacts LINK, volunteers with the organization are usually able to deliver food to them within 24 to 48 hours, he said. Butts said another unique aspect of LINK is how volunteers are able to assist stranded travelers at Dulles International Airport. He said they can respond within 24 hours to make sure they have what they need if they get stuck in the area while traveling. Butts said in the first 25 years at LINK they had about 15 to 20 churches rotating responsibilities. Since then some have dropped out and others have joined. Ashdown said the organization has received a lot of support from government organizations and elected officials, though none of it monetary. Local representatives hold food drives for the organization. Lombardozzi said LINK has been consistent in its leadership, but has seen many different volunteers. A lot of volunteers come to the organization around Christmas and end up staying when they find they enjoy the work, she said. Butts said in the near future he sees LINK working to improve communications with other area food pantries and banks. He said he's also working on one phone number for those in need of food to call so based on their location they can connect them with the closest location. Ashdown said he enjoys getting to meet new people and work with them through LINK, and at the same time the volunteers get to share the gospel and live out Christianity. LINK gives people the chance to be the hands and feet of Jesus, Lombardozzi said. When they serve clients they get to know them, pray with them and sometimes find other ways to help them, she said. Lombardozzi said she likes that an organization that includes many faith backgrounds has been able to collaborate to serve their community for 40 years, working together for something they believe in. To learn more about LINK or how to get involved, visit LINK's website here.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit a letter I sent to President Obama and Secretary Clinton calling for the firing of the U.S. ambassador to Vietnam. Ambassador David Shear should be removed because he has repeatedly failed to advocate for human rights and speak out for the voiceless in Vietnam. I recommend that he be replaced by a Vietnamese-American. I am particularly upset by Ambassador Shear's failure to invite more dissidents and human rights activists to the U.S. Embassy for a July 4 celebration after promising that he would. Further, I have been disappointed in Shear's handling of the case of Dr. Nguyen Quoc Quan, a Vietnamese-American democracy activist and U.S. citizen presently being held by the communist government of Vietnam. As I stated in the letter, ``America must be a voice for the voiceless. The U.S. Embassy in Vietnam must be an island of freedom, headed by a bold American ambassador. Ambassador Shear is not that man.'' House of Representatives, July 9, 2012. Hon. Barack H. Obama, The President, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: On May 15, 2012, the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, which I co-chair, held a hearing on human rights abuses in Vietnam. As you undoubtedly know, the State Department's own annual human rights report aptly describes Vietnam as an ``authoritarian state.'' During the hearing, several of my colleagues and I heard testimony from Mrs. Mai Huong Ngo, the wife of Dr. Nguyen Quoc Quan, a Vietnamese- American democracy activist and U.S. citizen. Upon his arrival at Tan Son Nhat International Airport in Ho Chi Minh City on April 17, he was arbitrarily detained and has been in prison ever since. Dr. Quan's wife was invited to testify in light of her husband's plight. Assistant Secretary Michael Posner was also invited to testify at the hearing on behalf of the State Department. At the time I expressed my shock and dismay that no one from the department, not even the U.S. ambassador to Vietnam, David Shear, had been in touch with Dr. Quan's wife since his detention. Only at my urging did Ambassador Shear initiate contact with Mrs. Ngo to update her on her husband's situation. This was disturbing on a number of levels. I have long believed that U.S. embassies should be islands of freedom-- especially in repressive countries like Vietnam. Under Ambassador Shear's leadership it didn't appear that the U.S. embassy in Hanoi was embracing this important task. But even more troubling is the fact that Dr. Quan is an American citizen, and yet there appeared to be little urgency to securing his release. In speaking by phone with Ambassador Shear following the hearing I expressed my concerns and urged him to host a July 4th celebration at the embassy, where the guest list was comprised of religious freedom and democracy activists in Vietnam. I stressed that he should fling open the doors of the embassy and invite Buddhist monks and nuns, Catholic priests and Protestant pastors, Internet bloggers and democracy activists. Such was the custom during the Reagan Administration, especially in the Soviet Union. This practice sent a strong message that America stood with those who stand for basic human rights. In many cases it afforded these individuals protection from future harassment and even imprisonment. Ambassador Shear said that he intended to honor this request. Following my conversation with him I received the enclosed letter from the department indicating that, ``Ambassador Shear continues to engage with civil society advocates, promoters of rule-of-law, and democracy activists and will welcome them to the Embassy's July 4th celebration.'' I took Ambassador Shear at his word and in fact shared this correspondence with members of the Vietnamese Diaspora community in the U.S., several of whom were greatly encouraged by this development. Late last week it was brought to my attention that many of the most prominent democracy and human rights activists in Vietnam were not invited to the event. These reports seemed starkly at odds with the assurances I had personally received from Ambassador Shear. I called him directly this morning to find out if the embassy had invited the dissidents as had been agreed upon. His response was appalling. He said that he had invited a few civil society activists but then said that he needed to maintain a ``balance.'' I then asked him for a list of the invitees. He initially refused saying he was unable to provide this information, even though presumably the embassy, which he leads, created the guest list. Then he said he would have to address this through State Department. I asked him when we might expect to receive a copy of the guest list and, after initially declining to be specific; he eventually conceded that it would be ``in a few weeks.'' Ambassador Shear's entire handling of this issue has been unacceptable. He showed little to no initiative in the case of Dr. Quan. Then, after appearing to recognize the shortsightedness of this approach, he agreed to host an Independence Day event at the embassy attended by human rights and democracy activists--only to go back on his word and mislead me about his intentions. Finally, when posed with a simple congressional request for additional information about the guest list at a U.S. embassy event, he was uncooperative at best and obstructionist at worst. In light of these realities, I write today to call for the firing of Ambassador Shear. Sadly, his sidelining of serious human rights issues in Vietnam is symptomatic of this administration's overall approach to human rights and religious freedom. Time and again these issues are put on the back-burner--to the detriment of freedom-loving people the world over. In a Constitution Day speech, President Ronald Reagan described the United States Constitution as ``a covenant we have made not only with ourselves, but with all of mankind.'' We have an obligation to keep that covenant. If you were to take this action, it would send a critical message to U.S. ambassadors globally, and just as importantly, to repressive governments which fear the words of the Constitution and the promise they hold as much as they fear the aspirations of their own people. I have repeatedly said that it would be fitting for a Vietnamese-American to serve as U.S. ambassador Vietnam-- someone who understands the country, the language, and the oppressive nature of the government having experienced it themselves before coming to the U.S. Such an individual would not be tempted to maintain smooth bilateral relations at all costs. Such an individual would embrace the cause of freedom. The Vietnamese people, and frankly millions of Vietnamese- Americans, deserve better than what Ambassador Shear and this administration are giving them. America must be a voice for the voiceless. The U.S. Embassy in Vietnam must be an island of freedom, headed by a bold American ambassador. Ambassador Shear is not that man. Best wishes. Sincerely, Frank R. Wolf, Member of Congress. Enclosure.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Loudoun County's longest-serving mayor, Elaine Walker of Lovettsville. At the end of the month, Mayor Walker will step down after serving as mayor of Lovettsville for nearly 22 years. Mayor Walker's accomplishments during her tenure as mayor include acquiring land for a 92-acre county park, helping develop the Lovettsville bike and pedestrian path and most recently making the town's veterans memorial a reality. I have had the privilege of knowing and working with Elaine for many years. She has been an outstanding mayor and her leadership and steady hand will be missed. Public service is one of our nation's highest callings and I extend my deepest gratitude for her service to our community. I wish her all the best in her future endeavors. I also submit the following article from Leesburg Today on Mayor Walker's final council meeting. Loudoun Mayors Pay Tribute To Walker [From Leesburg Today, June 22, 2012] It was all hugs and tributes in Lovettsville Thursday night as Mayor Elaine Walker received flowers and praise from a bevy of well wishers, including four of her fellow mayors, in what was her final council meeting. Walker, who did not seek reelection in May, steps down June 30 after 10 years on the Lovettsville Town Council and almost 22 as the town's mayor--a governance record that is unlikely to be matched any time soon. The mayors of four other Loudoun towns attended the meeting as well. ``It was a complete surprise, I had no idea,'' Walker said of the appearance of Purcellville Mayor Bob Lazaro, Leesburg Mayor Kristen Umstattd, Middleburg Mayor Betsy Davis and Hamilton Mayor Greg Wilmoth. Hillsboro Mayor Roger Vance and Round Hill Mayor Scott Ramsey were unable to be present. Davis said Walker's first reaction was to say to the group ``What are you doing here?'' Lazaro led the delegation, presenting Walker with a plaque honoring her service. ``We knew this was your last meeting and we wanted to say thank you for those 30 years,'' and for being a good friend and colleague to local government. Davis told Walker ``how much I will miss you as a friend, seeing you at all our [Coalition of Loudoun Towns] meetings. Thank you for all you've done for the county.'' ``But, we'll still have lunch,'' Umstattd said to her longtime colleague, also expressing her appreciation of Walker's service. Umstattd, who has been Leesburg's mayor for 10 years following service on the Town Council, will take over as the most tenured Loudoun mayor. Wilmoth, the newest mayor in the group, said he appreciated all the help Walker has given him. ``You have set the bar high for the rest of us,'' he said. Walker's husband Cliff Walker, who served on the council in the 1970s, was present as was Lazaro's wife Carolyn--who both would get together during Virginia Municipal League conferences. ``They're VML soulmates,'' Lazaro teased. Walker said she did not plan to go away into the sunset. ``I hope to still do some conferences, including the VML meetings. I love the camaraderie,'' she said. Vice Mayor Bob Zoldos, who will become Lovettsville's mayor July 1, invited everyone to share some sweet-toothed goodies in recognition of the occasion. The tributes went on with more flowers being presented--by the Lovettsville Fire-Rescue Squad in appreciation for Walker's long support, while Bob Zoldos' fifth grade son Bobby also presented a bouquet of flowers and read aloud a poem he had written in Walker's honor. The last tribute came from Lovettsville's Community Police Officer, Sheriff's Office Deputy Bryan Wacker, who is being transferred to a new assignment. He thanked Walker for her assistance and said she had been ``a great ally.'' He said his time with the mayor had been ``one of the best working relationships'' he'd ever had.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman from Maryland, and rise to support his initiative. Mr. Chairman, too many times a mother or a father or a loved one has gotten that dreaded call in the middle of the night that someone has been killed in an accident involving a drunk driver. And I appreciate my friend from Maryland raising the DADSS program, and also urge my good friend, the chairman, to look at this program as the bill moves forward.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. WOLF. This language came about as a result of our former colleague from Virginia, Tom Davis. There are many ideas behind it. I didn't know the amendment was coming up. I think that is part of the problem around here with the prefiling. It would be nice to let Members know what is coming up so they know. But I did see it, so I ran over. One, the number of Federal employees. This serves the Pentagon. It serves most of the Federal agencies in the government. But if you looked at the Metro today, most of the people riding it today were tourists from New Jersey and from Texas and from other places like that around. When you look at Metro with regard to the inauguration and many of the other events, that was the whole concept, that the administration, both Republican and Democrat--and this was a Republican amendment offered by Congressman Tom Davis to have this funding over a period of, I think, if my memory serves me, over a period of 10 years. So I rise in strong opposition to the Garrett amendment and ask that Congress maintain the integrity of what Congressman Davis and many other Congresses have done in the past.

Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman. This is the Nation's Capital. We are the Nation's Capital. People from all over the world come here. And I want to be sure--things are thrown around on this floor many times that are not accurate. A large proportion of the New York system was paid for with Federal taxpayer money. This was the agreement that was made by the Government Operations Committee, I think, in conjunction with Congressman Davis, Congressman Hoyer, and others a number of years ago. Congressman Davis is no longer here, but that was the whole sentiment with regard behind it. So I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the Garrett amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit remarks delivered at the recent memorial service, at Washington National Cathedral, for the late Chuck Colson. Emily Colson, Chuck's daughter, gave a compelling personal eulogy which gave us a glimpse into Chuck as a father and grandfather--his undying love and devotion to his family were beautiful to behold. The Reverend Dr. Timothy George delivered the homily--a stirring charge to those Chuck left behind to ``be not afraid.'' I commend these eloquent, heartfelt tributes which honor a man whose prophetic voice will be sorely missed. Emily Colson Memorial Service Transcript Good morning. My name is Emily Colson, and I am very blessed to be Chuck Colson's daughter. Today we celebrate a life well lived. I am thankful to be old enough to have known my father before he became a Christian and to see the change, the transformation in my father when Christ ruled in his heart. My father still had the same intellect and drive and passion for life, but a softness came over him. I think about my dad's office in his home in Florida, the desk highly polished where he worked tirelessly, and I think about the over-stuffed green chair in the corner where every morning he would kneel and pray. I think of the 3x5 cards my dad carried in his pocket underneath his jacket. There were 15 or 20 of them there, an ever growing to do list. But in that list he also had names, people that he prayed for every day. My dad became, as Scripture says, a new creation, and he loved his family differently. My father in his work changed people all over the world and he also changed his family. That drive became a source of an affectionate joke in our family. We love to get together for family reunions and vacations and all of our family would be so excited to relax for a week together. And we would find ourselves in one scheduled fun activity to the next scheduled fun activity. And then my father would announce, he would declare, let's all take five minutes and relax. I was teasing him about it one day, and he looked at me just with a hint of a smile, and he said ``Emily, six minutes would be wasteful.'' But even with that drive when I would call my dad or when he would call me, which was daily (sometimes it was more than once a day), you would think my dad had nothing else to do in his life. He was fully present. I thought he only did that for me. But I now know he has done it for everyone in our family. He put God first, family second above all else. That's the mark of a great father and a great leader. I encourage all of you who are fathers to understand the powerful impact you can have in your children's lives. Don't miss it. My father loved his family. He and Patty just celebrated 48 years. Patty has been there as a partner in ministry; has kept my dad humble and well fed. My dad loved his three children, his grandchildren, and he almost lived to see his first great-grandchild, who will be born next month. But perhaps for me the greatest mark of my dad's character has been his relationship with my son, Max. Max is 21 with a diagnosis of autism. And when we would come, which was frequently, my dad would clear his schedule and do nothing else but be present for Max and do everything Max loved, because Max needed his grandfather. And as it turns out, his grandfather needed Max. My father has stood by his convictions even when no one else was looking. My father has been a defender of the weak. We will miss his zest for life. He was always the first to laugh and the last one to stop laughing. Every meal he ate was the best one he'd ever had, or so he would tell us. He was our advisor, mentor, friend, shoulder and encourager. I think of that encouragement today. Today is a celebration of my father's life. But today is also about us, you and me. What will we do in the shadow of such an extraordinary role model. There is work to be done. I encourage you to continue the work God has begun through my father's life. Do the right thing. Seek the truth. Defend the weak. Live courageous lives. My father left a wonderful legacy and he left many writings for us to follow, to learn from. He left something for us this morning, for this moment today. ``I want my funeral services to be joyful. I don't want people to be sad because I believe with every ounce of conviction in my body that death is but a homecoming and that we will be in the presence of God. It is the culmination of life. It's a celebration.'' Be Not Afraid! A homily delivered by The Reverend Dr. Timothy George at the Memorial Service for Charles W. Colson at Washington National Cathedral on May 16, 2012 Invocation: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. In the ancient book of Joshua we read: ``Now after the death of Moses, the servant of the Lord, it came to pass that the Lord spake unto Joshua the son of Nun saying, `Moses my servant is dead: now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. . . . As I was with Moses, so I will be with thee: I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. Be strong and of a good courage. Be thou strong and very courageous. Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.'' (Joshua 1:1 9, selected verses) Charles Wendell Colson was once the youngest captain in the United States Marines and, at his request, he was laid to rest several days ago at Quantico National Cemetery. He loved his country fiercely and served it well. But we are here today, in this the nation's church, to celebrate the life of one who ended his days as a soldier in another army, the militia Christi, a battalion without bullets, soldiers of Christ, arrayed in truth, wielding weapons of faith, prayer, and love. To describe this change in the life of Chuck Colson requires us to use freighted words such as conversion, redemption, transformation. Not that Chuck ever completely outgrew the Marines. There was an intensity and drivenness about him that could be formidable. He did not suffer fools gladly and he was not blessed with an overabundance of patience. Chuck loved to tell the story about a man who accosted him on a plane one day, pushing, shoving, jostling for a seat. Chuck said to him, ``Fella, do you know who you're messing with? I'm an ex- marine, an ex-con, and if I weren't a Christian you'd be on the floor of this plane!'' Then he presented the Gospel to him. Chuck was not perfect, but he was forgiven. He never got over the wonder and surprise of having encountered Jesus Christ as a real person, a living reality; the one person in human history who passed through the gossamer veil of death and came back to tell us what was on the other side and how we should prepare for that journey by living every day in the light of eternity. Chuck's autobiography, Born Again, tells the story of a man born in Boston on the wrong side of the tracks. He clawed his way up the ever-spiraling ladder of success until he reached the pinnacle of power as Special Counsel to the President of the United States. But when his career was shattered in the wake of Watergate, he found himself in the position of another henchman, Thomas a Becket, who had done the bidding of King Henry II in the twelfth century. In a play about his life, Becket stands on stage, stripped of the insignia of his high office, and exclaims, ``Oh, God, there must be more, there must be something more!'' Chuck Colson had such a moment in the summer of 1973. Sitting alone late one night in the driveway of his friend Tom Phillips, filled with guilt and despair, he burst into tears ``crying so hard,'' he later said, ``it was like tying to swim underwater.'' That night he prayed his first real prayer, ``God, I don't know how to find you. But I'm going to try. Somehow I want to give myself to you.'' Take me, take me, take me, he repeated over and over. And God did take Chuck Colson from that moment of surrender to a federal prison in Alabama, to the experience of baptism as a new believer in Christ, to the founding of Prison Fellowship, a wonderful ministry to prisoners and their families now chartered in 113 countries around the world. And God took Chuck to the side of Mary Kay Beard, a former inmate and bank robber who could boast of being on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list. At our fundraisers, Chuck used to say that no one could ask for money like Mary Kay! Together with Chuck she founded a ministry called Angel Tree that has served some six million children of prisoners over the last three decades. Chuck never forgot that he served a Savior who had been crucified as a prisoner, one who knew what it was like to be stripped, sentenced, beaten, and mocked. He never forgot Jesus' words: ``I was in prison and you visited me.'' Chuck's conversion was not only emotional, it was also intellectual and moral as well. ``I could not sidestep,'' he said, ``the central question God had placed squarely before me. Was I to accept without reservation Jesus Christ as Lord of my life? It was like a gate before me. There was no way to walk around it. I would step through or I would remain outside. A `maybe' or `I need more time' was kidding myself. The phrase `accept Jesus Christ' had sounded at first both pious and mystical, the language of the zealot, maybe black magic stuff. But the question was: did I believe what Jesus said? If I did, then I accepted. Not mystical or weird at all, and with no in-between ground left. Either I would believe or I would not--and believe it all or none of it.'' Of course, there have been and still are the critics. When Born Again was released, Chuck's hometown newspaper, The Boston Globe, wrote: ``If Colson can repent, there just has to be hope for everyone!'' To which Chuck would be the first to say, Yes! that's exactly the point. Hope for everyone, anyone. The invitation has gone out with your name on it. It says RSVP. There is no limit to this love of God. His grace and forgiveness reach to the least, the last, and the lost, which, at the end of the day, is all of us, each of us sooner or later, in one way or other. Of all the tributes that have been written about Chuck in recent days, the one that touched me most deeply was by Mr. Lanny Davis, who served as Special Counsel to President Clinton, the same title Chuck Colson had in his work at the White House with President Nixon. Mr. Davis described his meeting with Chuck several years ago at a dinner before the National Prayer Breakfast. They greeted one another, and Chuck said to Mr. Davis, ``I've wanted for a very long time to say something to you: I am sorry, may God forgive me.'' ``I looked at him, stunned,'' Mr. Davis wrote. Chuck continued, ``You know, I'm the guy who put you on the enemies list--that was wrong, please forgive me.'' Mr. Davis said, ``I looked into his eyes and I felt a strange and deep peace. It was eerie. I also saw a profound goodness and spirituality. My eyes teared up. `Of course I forgive you, Mr. Colson.' Mr. Davis then asked for Chuck's forgiveness, as years before he himself had spoken with hatred about Chuck. Immediately, Chuck hugged him. ``I learned an important lesson that night,'' Lanny Davis said. ``I vowed that I would never use the word `hate' about people in politics with whom I disagreed.'' Over the years, Chuck came to see the close connection between the despair he witnessed within the prisons and the ``culture of death'' in society on the outside. He knew that genuine reform had to embrace the family, the community, and the church as well as the state. He came to see that the work he had done, and continued to do, in the prisons would ultimately fail unless it was undergirded by a robust Christian worldview, an understanding of what it is we believe and how it applies to our lives. This perspective was reinforced by the three great intellectual heroes to whom Chuck turned again and again. William Wilberforce, the young member of Parliament who devoted his life to the abolition of the slave trade. And Abraham Kuyper, the Reformed theologian and prime minister of the Netherlands whom Chuck quoted, I believe, more than anyone else. Kuyper said: ``There is not one square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: `Mine, that belongs to me!' '' And there was Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a champion of faith and conscience in one of the darkest moments of human history. Bonhoeffer, who preached a gospel of costly grace and who, in 1937, wrote ``When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.'' Chuck Colson was a Baptist but he had a passion for Christian unity that reached far beyond his own denomination. In the early nineteen-nineties, Chuck and his close friend, the late Father Richard John Neuhaus, brought together a group known as Evangelicals and Catholics Together--not a mere coalition but a fellowship of earnest Evangelicals and faithful Catholics who recognized that beyond all the differences that continued to separate us, we shared a fundamental unity as brothers and sisters in Christ, a vision for reconciliation that continues still. This same impulse was behind the 2009 Manhattan Declaration, which began as a statement and has now become a movement of more than half a million Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox believers all committed to the three most pressing, and increasingly contested moral issues of our time: the sanctity of life for every single person including the elderly, the weak, and the pre-born, each of whom is made in the image of God (imago Dei) and is worthy of our respect and protection; the historic institution of marriage, not for the sake of traditionalism but for the flourishing of families and the nurture of children, an institution Cardinal Timothy Dolan has called the cornerstone of society; and religious freedom, not only for Christians, but for all persons everywhere, and for religious institutions as well as for individuals, for synagogues, mosques, temples and churches and the work they do on behalf of the common good in education and benevolence. Chuck believed in these things and he stood for them with courage, charity and civility. For those who thought that this was just the old political Colson in a new disguise, he reminded them that while citizens in a representative democracy such as ours have a special responsibility, the fundamental issue is not political but spiritual. What Chuck advocated was a chastened form of civic virtue based on the fact that Christians hold a dual citizenship, one in this world, and the other, as St. Paul said, in heaven. With St. Augustine, Chuck wanted us to avoid two mistakes that Christians have often made and that still tempt us today. One is the lure of utopianism, the mistake of thinking that we can produce a human society that will solve our problems and bring about the Kingdom of God on earth. This was the basic error of both liberalism and Marxism in the nineteenth century. But the other error is equally disastrous: cynicism. This happens when we become so jaded by the evil around us that we are tempted to give up on this world altogether, to retreat into our own self-contained circle of contentment, which can be either a pious holy huddle or a secular skeptics club. How are we to avoid such reactions? Perhaps Francis of Assisi can help us here. One day after his conversion to Christ when he was riding back to Assisi, he saw a leper on the road. He reached out to embrace the leper and actually gave him a kiss. It was the kiss of peace. In that moment when he embraced this filthy diseased outcast, Francis said that he was overcome by a dual sensation. On the one hand, he was nauseated. He wanted to throw up. On the other hand, he was permeated with a sense of sweetness (suavitas) and well-being, and both sensations were in that one embrace. Chuck Colson knew that both reactions were critical to our faith. If all we experience is nausea, we will become cynics. We will give up on the world and turn away from it in despair. But if all we have is sweetness, then our faith will amount to little more that sentimental fluff, what Schopenhauer called an ``unscrupulous optimism that leads us nowhere but to vanity.'' Genuine faith and true ministry take place on the thin edge between nausea and sweetness. Chuck Colson often experienced that thin edge. Once while visiting Trivandrum, India, he was taken to a camp with more than a thousand inmates, most of them ``untouchables.'' Caged in squalid holes, with no toilets or running water, they were totally dehumanized, treated as outcasts. Speaking through a Hindi translator, Chuck shared his own testimony of grace and forgiveness. After the closing prayer, acting against the advice he had been given, he jumped down from the platform and ran to touch the men before him. Later, he wrote about this event: ``Suddenly, like a flight of birds, men rose to their feet and circled around me. I shook every hand I could. Most of the men just reached and touched; they were desperate to `touch,' to know that the love God offers is real.'' Later, they went back to their grim cells. But that night, through the witness of Chuck Colson, they had received some good news: in Jesus Christ there are no untouchables. All of us bear that message whenever we walk the thin edge of costly discipleship. John Calvin was right when he warned against extravagant speculation in the mystery of death. There is much we do not know. And this is a good occasion for each of us to think about our own deaths, for death waits for each of us around the next corner, or the next. John Donne spoke of the democracy of the dead. Mortality is egalitarian. It comes equally to each of us, and when it comes, it makes us all equal. Today we mourn with Chuck's beloved Patty, the Colson family, and countless citizens across our land and around the world who have lost a great friend, champion, leader, and world Christian statesman. But we do not grieve as those who have no hope, for as St. Paul has reminded us, to live is Christ and to die is gain. It has been said that this life is a chasm of light suspended between two eternities of darkness. But the Gospel Chuck Colson believed and proclaimed tells a different story: this life is the real shadowland, and often a vale of tears, suspended between two eternities of light. We come into this world, each of us, from the hands of the invisible God who dwells in light inaccessible. And, we leave this world, trusting in Jesus Christ, to go into what the African American preacher calls the land of ``no more,'' no more sorrow, no more crying, no more pain or death, no more crime or violence, no more prison and no more night, for we go into that land beyond the shadows where we shall have no need of candles, nor light of the sun, for the Lord God will give light to all those gathered around his throne and that of the Lamb. And in the meantime? How now shall we live? One of Chuck's last books was titled The Good Life. And it closes with these words: ``The good life? A life worth living? Indeed. But the good life is possible only if we live in expectation that life will end as richly as we lived it, if we laugh off the maggots and affirm that these bones shall live in the resurrection. Live each day as if it were the best of days and the last of days. And when the last of days comes, live it as the best of days.'' And who will take the place of Chuck Colson? Earlier this year I visited the grave of the great evangelist D.L. Moody who died in 1899 in Northfield, Massachusetts. At that time, everyone was saying, who can fill the shoes of the great D.L. Moody? There seemed no one on the horizon who commanded the respect and loyalty that Moody had. It's quite depressing to read the religious press of those days. But unbeknownst to anyone on earth at the time, a little baby named John was about to be born to Sir Arnold Stott and his wife Lily. About the same time, another little boy named Billy entered the Graham family in Charlotte. A few years later, Pastor and Sister King in Atlanta celebrated the birth of baby Martin. And in 1931, in a hardscrabble section of Boston, a baby named Charlie Colson arrived. Today the servant of God named Chuck Colson is dead and the Lord is saying to us as he said to Joshua and the children of Israel long ago: as I was with Chuck, so I will be with you. Be not afraid! I will not fail you, nor forsake you. Be strong and of a good courage. Be not afraid! Be not dismayed. For the Lord your God is with you wherever you go. Let us pray: Oh, God, whose days are without end and whose mercies cannot be numbered: Make us, we beseech thee, deeply sensible of the shortness and uncertainty of life. Remind us of the wonderful promise of our Lord Jesus Christ who said: ``Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. We praise thee that through his atoning death on the cross, and his glorious resurrection, Jesus has opened wide the gates of eternal life to all who believe. Today we give thanks for thy servant Charles Wendell Colson, for his steadfastness in faith, obedience to thy Word, and love for thy Church, for his gracious smile, loving touch, and contagious confidence in Jesus Christ his only comfort in life and death, and ours as well. We say farewell in the sure and certain hope of the resurrection, until we meet again in that blessed land of ``no more'', through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost now and forevermore. Amen.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee, I am very sympathetic to the concerns raised by the gentleman from Texas. I understand that last year DOJ notified prospective FY11 SCAAP applicants of this coming change and encouraged jurisdictions to work closely with DHS to increase inmate alien status verification. I did not hear of any concerns with this new requirement during the consideration of CJS appropriations for FY12 or 13, but I would be pleased to work with you, as well as the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, to help ensure that the SCAAP reimbursement methodology is equitable for all types of jurisdictions and maximizes the verification of status for individual aliens. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Inspiring Leaders in Technology and Engineering, ILITE, Robotics Team at Battlefield High School in Haymarket, Virginia, for its outstanding performance in winning the FIRST Robotics World Championship. Ninety thousand students from around the world competed in the FIRST Robotics competition. Battlefield's FIRST Tech Challenge team won the world championship title at the world championship in St. Louis, Missouri, this April, while the First Robotics Competition, FRC, team finished as a quarter-finalist. Both teams won awards at the regional and state level prior to participating in the world championship. I was pleased to visit Battlefield High School on May 21, and meet with students from the robotics team after their championship victory. Educating American students in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, is critical to maintaining U.S. competitiveness, and I commend ILITE Robotics at Battlefield High School on their success. The ILITE Robotics Team is coached by Professor Gail Drake, and is comprised of: Chris Blaylock, Gaelan Dean, Jon Gallion, Aaron Guo, Logan Hambrick, John Hitt, Jacob Hogan, Natalie Jones, Terri Jones, Joel Kaminski, Colin Kauv, Kent Komine, Jakob Kressel, William Lahann, Jaehoon Lee, Daniel Lopez, Jacob Maltbie, Joseph Melir, Alex Missar, Deanna Moser, Matt Moser, Sara O'Malley, Garrett Ormond, Wonsik (David) Park, David Powell, Rainier Rabena, Cary Reese, Melanie Sattler, Erik Seastead, Joanna Senseng, Clayton Shablom, Donny Shaw, Justin Shaw, Jordan Soriano, Evan Teitelman, Michael Toman, Logan Wilding.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit my recent correspondence with Mr. Carter G. Phillips, managing partner for Sidley Austin LLP, regarding the firm's representation of Chinese telecom firm Huawei. As noted in the letters, the U.S. national security community has serious concerns with Huawei's connections to the People's Liberation Army and Chinese intelligence. Equally troubling is Huawei's well-documented history of supporting America's greatest adversaries--some of the most repressive and brutal regimes in modern history--including the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq and the current regime in Iran. Today, through Huawei, China exports its repressive technologies to likeminded governments. An October 27, 2011, Wall Street Journal piece reported that the Chinese telecom giant Huawei ``now dominates Iran's government-controlled mobile-phone industry . . . it plays a role in enabling Iran's state security network.'' Respected national security reporter Bill Gertz also recently reported that Huawei has also been ``linked to sanctions-busting in Saddam Hussein's Iraq during the 1990s, when the company helped network Iraqi air defenses at a time when U.S. and allied jets were flying patrols to enforce a no-fly zone. The company also worked with the Taliban during its short reign in Afghanistan to install a phone system in Kabul.'' For these reasons, I also wrote to Ms. Samantha Power, the director for multilateral affairs on the National Security Council at the White House. I also submit this letter for the Record. Given Huawei's troubling activities in Iran, I urged Ms. Power, in her capacity as chair of the newly-created Atrocities Prevention Board, to consider whether the company should be sanctioned. It is inconceivable to me that a respected law firm like Sidley Austin would represent a Chinese state-directed company like Huawei, given the significant national security concerns as well as its appalling record of supporting some of the world's worst regimes. House of Representatives, Washington, DC, April 25, 2012. Mr. Carter G. Phillips, Managing Partner, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington DC. Dear Mr. Phillips: It has recently come to my attention that a lobbyist with your firm has been retained by the Chinese telecom firm Huawei to lobby Congress and the administration. Given the longstanding and serious concerns from senior officials in the U.S. intelligence and defense communities, as well as the Congress, about Huawei's connections to the Peoples' Liberation Army and the potential vulnerabilities of its telecom products, I was surprised that a firm of your caliber would agree to represent a company that is so closely connected to the Chinese government. In all my years in Washington, very rarely have I seen the leadership of defense, intelligence and civilian agencies come together in such a concerted effort to warn of a security threat from a foreign entity. When the White House, intelligence community, Defense Department and the Commerce Department all have worked to block Huawei from gaining greater access to U.S. networks, everyone should take notice. Just last month, during a hearing before the House Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) Appropriations subcommittee, which I chair, Secretary of Commerce John Bryson noted that the ``Commerce Department has been very focused on Huawei.'' Secretary Bryson told the panel ``I think you're right in characterizing that as a considerable challenge to our country. It appears that Huawei has capabilities that we may not fully detect to divert information. It's a challenge to our country . . . we have taken some steps to not have Huawei advance yet further in our country but the reality is in the market--they are advancing further so we need to address that further.'' Also noteworthy is that shortly after Secretary Bryson's testimony before the CJS subcommittee, Australia announced that is has banned Huawei from bidding to help build a nationwide high-speed Internet network due to concern about cyber attacks traced to China. Australia's actions follow several similar moves by the U.S. government to block Huawei access to American networks. In 2009, The Washington Post reported that the National Security Agency ``called AT&T because of fears that China's intelligence agencies could insert digital trapdoors into Huawei's technology that would serve as secret listening posts in the U.S. communications network. In 2010, then- Commerce Secretary Locke called Sprint CEO Dan Hesse to raise concerns about Huawei, which ultimately resulted in Sprint choosing not to use Huawei equipment. These moves should not be surprising given Huawei's long- documented deep ties to the Chinese government and the Peoples Liberation Army. According to a 2005 report by the RAND Corporation, ``both the [Chinese] government and the military tout Huawei as a national champion,'' and ``one does not need to dig too deeply to discover that [many Chinese information technology and telecommunications firms] are the public face for, sprang from, or are significantly engaged in joint research with state research institutes under the Ministry of Information Industry, defense-industrial corporations, or the military.'' The U.S. business community also is concerned about Huawei. On April 6, The Wall Street Journal reported that ``Cisco Systems Inc. Chief Executive John Chambers identified Huawei Technologies Co. as its toughest rival, stating that the Chinese company doesn't always `play by the rules' in areas such as intellectual property protection and computer security . . . he suggested that, [unlike Huawei], Cisco is considered trustworthy by governments around the world.'' It's not just Huawei's longstanding and close connections to Chinese intelligence that is troubling. Huawei has also been a leading supplier of critical telecom services to some of the worst regimes around the world. Last year, The Wall Street Journal reported that Huawei ``now dominates Iran's government-controlled mobile-phone industry . . . it plays a role in enabling Iran's state security network.'' And given the president's April 23 executive order addressing entities that are providing Iran and Syria with technologies to repress their people, I would think representing Huawei would give you further pause. For these reasons, I urge you to reconsider your firm's relationship with Huawei. I think you would agree that Sidley Austin's reputation and integrity is worth far more than its contract with a state-directed company like Huawei. Best wishes. Sincerely, Frank R. Wolf, Member of Congress.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, today is the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Department of Agriculture, which was established by President Lincoln on May 15, 1862. I commend the hardworking individuals at the department who work with all elements of the food supply chain--including our farmers, growers, and ranchers, to support for packers and shippers, marketers and processors, equipment suppliers, researchers, and retailers--to ensure that Americans have access to affordable, safe and abundant food. The USDA also assists with important conservation efforts, and connects the most vulnerable in our society with critical food resources. As we mark this anniversary, I hope we all will take this opportunity to recognize the continued need that exists at our local food pantries. I meet with food banks and pantries on a regular basis, and demand is at an all-time high. Families who use to donate food regularly are now coming to receive food. I appreciate the support of my colleagues for the inclusion of language in the FY12 agriculture spending bill that was signed into law to make it easier to donate excess food from the Federal school lunch program to local food banks by ensuring they are covered by the Good Samaritan Act. The American agriculture community should be commended for their work to ensure that everyone has safe food on the table.