Affected Public Individual: Fill & Download for Free

Very good question, whether some people acknowledge this or not, laws in Europe today, especially Germany, largely revolve around what happened during the Third Reich and the Holocaust.I emphasize that teachers begin to do a better job educating grade school kids about this particular part of history, as our world, our national policies as well as how we treat other humans, our tolerance towards refugees, our tolerance to anyone that’s different than us …etc… is largely based on the outcome of the second world war, Hitler and the Holocaust.Ahnenpass - WikipediaThe Ahnenpaß documented the Aryan lineage of citizens of Nazi Germany. It was one of the forms of the Aryan certificate and issued by the "Reich Association of Marriage Registrars in Germany"Nuremberg Laws - WikipediaThe Nuremberg Laws were antisemitic and racist laws in Nazi Germany. They were enacted by the Reichstag on 15 September 1935, at a special meeting convened during the annual Nuremberg Rally of the Nazi Party.Rassenschande - WikipediaRassenschande or Blutschande was an anti-miscegenation concept in Nazi German racial policy, pertaining to sexual relations between Aryans and non-Aryans. It was put into practice by policies like the Aryan certificate requirement, and later the Nuremberg Laws, adopted unanimously by the Reichstag on 15 September 1935.Nazi concentration camps - WikipediaFrom 1933 to 1945, Nazi Germany operated more than a thousand concentration camps on its own territory and in parts of German-occupied Europe. The first camps were established in March 1933 immediately after Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany.What was the key reason for WWII?Hitler’s plan to expand Germany eastward by means of militaristic expansion, slave labor and genocide.What is the number one WWII universal key factor? LEBENSRAUMLebensraum - WikipediaThe German concept of Lebensraum comprises policies and practices of settler colonialism which proliferated in Germany from the 1890s to the 1940s. First popularized around 1901, Lebensraum became a geopolitical goal of Imperial Germany in World War I originally, as the core element of the Septemberprogramm of territorial expansion.Generalplan Ost - WikipediaThe Generalplan Ost, abbreviated GPO, was the Nazi German government's plan for the genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale, and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans. It was to be undertaken in territories occupied by Germany during World War II.Generalplan Ost - Holocaust AtlasThe parliamentary structure and how the EU operates is too reflected by the actions of Hitler and the Nazis in the second world war.Memorial to German resistance to Nazism, Berlin, Germany ...Also applies to the state open borders refugee policy.How the German govt answers the call of asylum seekers.Germany being the only country NOT! closing borders to the refugees and asylum seekers.In Germany, Confronting Shameful Legacy Is Essential Part of Police Training‘Demilitarize and civilize’Visiting a former concentration camp is mandatory for every future police officer in Berlin. It is one of the ways in which policing was fundamentally overhauled in Germany after World War II. Cadets are taught in unsparing detail about the shameful legacy of policing under the Nazis — and how it informs the mission and institution of policing today.“After the war, we had to start from scratch,” said Klaus Weinhauer, a historian and police expert at Bielefeld University. “The country had to break with its history — and so did the police.”Germany’s democratic postwar constitution includes a strict separation of powers: The Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the country’s domestic intelligence agency, cannot make arrests while the police have limited surveillance powers. The two are barred from exchanging information outside a dedicated counterterrorism forum.In the Bundeswehr any soldier is allowed to disobey a direct order from a superior officer, if the order conflicts with his/her humanitarian, moral code of ethics. Only the German army has such a rule.Why German Soldiers Don’t Have to Obey OrdersGerman law forbids the use of its military to do anything other than defend Germany itself, though the military does participate in some humanitarian and NATO coalition missions. Instead of blind obedience, the military emphasizes Innere Führung, a hard-to-translate concept that centers the military experience around the inner conscience of each individual.In Germany all Far-Right groups like the NPD are banned for life from ever taking part in parliamentary elections.In Germany Holocaust denial has the strictest penalty.Germany's parliament passed legislation in 1985, making it a crime to deny the extermination of the Jews. In 1994, the law was tightened. Now, anyone who publicly endorses, denies or plays down the genocide against the Jews faces a maximum penalty of five years in jail and no less than the imposition of a fine."It affects the agitator who claims the Jews prey on the German people, that they invented the Holocaust for that purpose, that foreigners should all be thrown out and that the discussion should finally be over with," Benz said. "He must be punished because he engages in incitement of the masses, because he slanders the memory of those murdered, because he slanders our fellow citizens."Austria imposes even tougher penalties for such offences.Jewish places of worship in Germany during holidays are always protected by special police guard units.In Germany, wearing Nazi insignia in public, singing Nazi tunes, playing Nazi military marches and doing a “Sieg Heil” Hitler salute is forbidden and illegal.Until recently “Mein Kampf” the book Hitler wrote while in prison was banned in Germany.Denazification - WikipediaDenazification (German: Entnazifizierung) was an Allied initiative to rid German and Austrian society, culture, press, economy, judiciary, and politics of the National Socialist ideology (Nazism). It was carried out by removing those who had been Nazi Party or SS members from positions of power and influence and by disbanding or rendering impotent the organisations associated with Nazism. The programme of denazification was launched after the end of the Second World War and was solidified by the Potsdam Agreement in August 1945.History of Germany (1945-1990) - WikipediaLaw, Justice, and the Holocaust | The Holocaust EncyclopediaIllegally displaying Nazi symbols in Germany can be punished by three years in jail. The ban broadly exempts art, but which works are allowed to show swastikas, SS sig runes and such is often more a matter of the medium.Germany's confusing rules on swastikas and Nazi symbols | DW | 14.08.2018Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany - WikipediaThe authors of the Basic Law sought to ensure that a potential dictator would never again be able to come to power in the country. Although some of the Basic Law is based on the Weimar Republic's constitution, the authors also elevated human rights and human dignity to core values protected by the Basic Law. The principles of democracy, republicanism, social responsibility, and federalism are key components of the Basic Law; the principles and fundamental rights underlying these articles are constitutionally entrenched and; although several of these articles have since been reworded, extended or refined, they are barred from being removed or repealed by the normal amendment process.

Well lets see, it’s been a pretty long time since the fact.Everything you see in Germany is a constant reminder of the past.Germans born after the post war era have nothing at all to do with Hitler and his Reich.The very same Germans who in 1968 protested and demonstrated against the former Nazis like Konrad Adenauer becoming members of the German parliament.The Frankfurt students would later became iconic, critical figures in the fight for equality and human rights.Revisiting Germany's protest movement of 1968 in photos | DW | 27.04.2018Frankfurt School - WikipediaWest German student movement - WikipediaThe West German student movement or sometimes called the 1968 movement in West Germany was a social movement that consisted of mass student protests in West Germany in 1968, participants in the movement would later come to be known as 68ers.The Frankfurt students sparked protests against racism and inequality across the globe, that subsequently led to the Civil Rights Movement in the US.Germany is the only country in Europe that had accepted full responsibility for the actions of it’s National Socialist predecessor.Stolperstein - WikipediaGermany is the only country in Europe that is still tracking down and prosecuting former Nazis, some of these people are almost a hundred years old.I personally find it rather comical.https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/10/18/year-old-former-ss-guard-is-trial-german-juvenile-court-nazi-crimes-investigations-surge/Former Nazi guard, 93, to stand trial in Germany over thousands of camp murders.In the Bundeswehr any soldier is allowed to disobey a direct order from a superior officer, if the order conflicts with his/her humanitarian, moral code of ethics. Only the German army has such a rule.German law forbids the use of its military to do anything other than defend Germany itself, though the military does participate in some humanitarian and NATO coalition missions. Instead of blind obedience, the military emphasizes Innere Führung, a hard-to-translate concept that centers the military experience around the inner conscience of each individual.Why German Soldiers Don’t Have to Obey Orders‘Demilitarize and civilize’Visiting a former concentration camp is mandatory for every future police officer in Berlin. It is one of the ways in which policing was fundamentally overhauled in Germany after World War II. Cadets are taught in unsparing detail about the shameful legacy of policing under the Nazis — and how it informs the mission and institution of policing today.Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany - WikipediaThe authors of the Basic Law sought to ensure that a potential dictator would never again be able to come to power in the country. Although some of the Basic Law is based on the Weimar Republic's constitution, the authors also elevated human rights and human dignity to core values protected by the Basic Law. The principles of democracy, republicanism, social responsibility, and federalism are key components of the Basic Law; the principles and fundamental rights underlying these articles are constitutionally entrenched and; although several of these articles have since been reworded, extended or refined, they are barred from being removed or repealed by the normal amendment process.Germany has some of the toughest laws in Europe concerning promotion of Nazism.German resistance to Nazism - WikipediaHistory of Germany (1945-1990) - WikipediaLaw, Justice, and the Holocaust | The Holocaust EncyclopediaDenazification - WikipediaDenazification (German: Entnazifizierung) was an Allied initiative to rid German and Austrian society, culture, press, economy, judiciary, and politics of the National Socialist ideology (Nazism). It was carried out by removing those who had been Nazi Party or SS members from positions of power and influence and by disbanding or rendering impotent the organisations associated with Nazism. The programme of denazification was launched after the end of the Second World War and was solidified by the Potsdam Agreement in August 1945.Illegally displaying Nazi symbols in Germany can be punished by three years in jail. The ban broadly exempts art, but which works are allowed to show swastikas, SS sig runes and such is often more a matter of the medium.Germany's confusing rules on swastikas and Nazi symbols | DW | 14.08.2018Holocaust denial or downplaying, white washing the actions of the National Socialist state and it’s leaders, will likely leave you with a hefty fine and a prison sentence for up to 5 years.Germany's parliament passed legislation in 1985, making it a crime to deny the extermination of the Jews. In 1994, the law was tightened. Now, anyone who publicly endorses, denies or plays down the genocide against the Jews faces a maximum penalty of five years in jail and no less than the imposition of a fine."It affects the agitator who claims the Jews prey on the German people, that they invented the Holocaust for that purpose, that foreigners should all be thrown out and that the discussion should finally be over with," Benz said."He must be punished because he engages in incitement of the masses, because he slanders the memory of those murdered, because he slanders our fellow citizens."Austria imposes even tougher penalties for such offences.Germany is the only country in Europe to utilize modern technology for uncovering more data about it’s dark past.Who can use the Arolsen Archives?Anyone who is looking for information on the victims of National Socialism, former inmates of concentration camps or forced laborers, or for information on displaced persons during the period following 1945. The Federal Republic of Germany finances our work to help enable individuals to come to terms with the consequences of Nazi persecution. This means we can offer our services free of charge to survivors and to victims’ relatives: we conduct research and search for traces which can help them to come to a better understanding of their family history. We also offer a range of services for other interested parties from the fields of education, research or archiving.Arolsen Archives - International Center on Nazi Persecution“Collective guilt” feeling is still present among many Germans.German collective guilt - WikipediaGerman collective guilt refers to the notion of a collective guilt attributed to Germany and its people for perpetrating the Holocaust and starting World War II.No German today should feel any guilt for the past.Learn from it? Yes!Pass the knowledge to future generations? Yes!I believe that in general it is beneficial to learn from history.Observe the mistakes of others, to not repeat the same mistakes.The Soviet Union, rather it’s leadership, committed innumerable atrocities against it’s own citizens, modern historians estimate the number of Soviet victims to be in the range of 8–60 million.Comparison of Nazism and Stalinism - WikipediaA number of authors have carried out comparisons of Nazism and Stalinism in which they have considered the similarities and differences of the two ideologies and political systems, what relationship existed between the two regimes, and why both of them came to prominence at the same time during the 20th century.Red Terror - WikipediaThe Red Terror was a period of political repression and mass killings carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. The term is usually applied to Bolshevik political repression during the Civil War, as distinguished from the White Terror carried out by the White Army against their political enemies. It was modeled on the Terror of the French Revolution. The Cheka carried out the repressions of the Red Terror. Estimates for the total number of people killed during the Red Terror for the initial period of repression are at least 10,000. Estimates for the total number of victims of Bolshevik repression vary widely. One source asserts that the total number of victims of repression and pacification campaigns could be 1.3 million, whereas another gives estimates of 28,000 executions per year from December 1917 to February 1922.Bolsheviks - WikipediaThe Bolsheviks, also known in English as the Bolshevists, were a radical far-left Marxist faction founded by Vladimir Lenin and Alexander Bogdanov that split from the Menshevik faction of the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, a revolutionary socialist political party formed in 1898, at its Second Party Congress in 1903. After forming their own party in 1912, the Bolsheviks took power in Russia in November 1917, overthrowing the liberal Provisional Government of Alexander Kerensky, and became the only ruling party in the subsequent Soviet Russia and its successor state, the Soviet Union. They considered themselves the leaders of the revolutionary working class of Russia. Their beliefs and practices were often referred to as Bolshevism.October Revolution - WikipediaThe October Revolution, officially known in Soviet historiography as the Great October Socialist Revolution, was a revolution in Russia led by the Bolshevik Party of Vladimir Lenin that was instrumental in the larger Russian Revolution of 1917–1923. It took place through an armed insurrection in Petrograd on 25 October 1917.Gulag - WikipediaThe Gulag or GULAG was the government agency in charge of the Soviet network of forced-labour camps set up by order of Vladimir Lenin, reaching its peak during Joseph Stalin's rule from the 1930s to the early 1950s. English-language speakers also use the word gulag to refer to all forced-labour camps that existed in the Soviet Union, including camps that existed in the post-Stalin era. The Gulag is recognised as a major instrument of political repression in the Soviet Union. The camps housed a wide range of convicts, from petty criminals to political prisoners, large numbers of whom were convicted by simplified procedures, such as by NKVD troikas or by other instruments of extrajudicial punishment. In 1918–22, the agency was administered by Cheka, followed by the GPU, OGPU, later by the NKVD, and in the final years by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.Great Purge - WikipediaThe Great Purge or the Great Terror was a campaign of political repression in the Soviet Union which occurred from 1936 to 1938. It involved a large scale repression of wealthy peasants, genocidal acts against ethnic minorities, a purge of the Communist Party and government officials, and the Red Army leadership, widespread police surveillance, suspicion of saboteurs, counter-revolutionaries, imprisonment, and arbitrary executions.Doctors' plot - WikipediaThe Doctors' plot Russian: дело врачей, romanized: delo vrachey, lit. 'doctors' case', also known as the case of saboteur-doctors or killer-doctors was an antisemitic campaign in the Soviet Union organized by Joseph Stalin. In 1951–1953, a group of predominantly Jewish doctors from Moscow were accused of a conspiracy to assassinate Soviet leaders.Holodomor - WikipediaThe Holodomor was a man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. It is also known as the Terror-Famine and Famine-Genocide in Ukraine, and sometimes referred to as the Great Famine or the Ukrainian Genocide of 1932–33.Collectivization in the Soviet Union - WikipediaThe Soviet Union implemented the collectivization of its agricultural sector between 1928 and 1940 during the ascendancy of Joseph Stalin. It began during and was part of the first five-year plan. The policy aimed to integrate individual landholdings and labour into collectively-controlled and state-controlled farms: Kolkhozy and Sovkhozy accordingly.People Involved - Ukraine HolodomorJOSEPH STALINThe leader of the Soviet Union at this time was Joseph Stalin.Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was born on December 18, 1878. He slowly worked his way up the social ladder, until, at the death of the previous leader, Bolshevik, he became the leader of the Soviet Union. Stalin was primarily responsible for ordering the Ukrainian people to be forced onto collective farms, and he was also reponsible for the Holodomor.Joseph Stalin had big plans for the industrialization of the Soviet Union. He resented the fact that the Ukrainian people were not willing to immediately conform with his ideas and rules.Stalin held little value for human life, but saw people just as pawns for him to use.During World War II, many Soviet Union members died. In fact, the Soviet Union suffered the most casualties [close to 20 million] during World War II. This is a substantial number, but the Soviet Union lost more people due to Stalin's political purges, famine, and banishment, than they did during the war. Because of Stalin, almost 30-35 million of his own people were lost.VIACHESLAV MOLOTOVViacheslav Molotov was head of the Council for People's Commissars of the USSR, during the time of the Holodomor. Molotov worked closely with Stalin to enforce the Holodomor on the Ukrainian people. He played a huge role in making sure that the Ukrainian people suffered. Viacheslav Molotov personally monitored the confiscation of grain from the Ukrainian people during the Holodomor.VSEVOLOD BALYTSKYVsevolod Balytsky was the head of the GPU [the Soviet Unions secret police] at the time of the Holodomor. He sentenced many Ukrainian peasants to death, because he falsified [made up] charges against them. He also helped Stalin and the Soviet government exterminate many Ukrainian people during the Holodomor. Balytsky ensured the the Ukranian people truly were being starved to death.THE COMMUNIST YOUTH LEAGUEStalin utilized help from the Communist Youth League, a group of young men, that helped Stalin enforce his rules and regulations.TROOPS AND SECRET POLICEStalin utilized the regular troops of the Soviet Union, as well as the Soviets secret police to monitor the collection of grain, ensure that the collective farms were running, and to enforce the Holodomor.Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - WikipediaThe Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was a non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to partition Poland between them.10 Shocking Crimes Of The Soviet Secret Police - ListverseKatyn massacre - WikipediaThe Katyn massacre was a series of mass executions of nearly 22,000 Polish military officers and intelligentsia carried out by the Soviet Union, specifically the NKVD in April and May 1940. Though the killings also occurred in the Kalinin and Kharkiv prisons and elsewhere, the massacre is named after the Katyn Forest, where some of the mass graves were first discovered.KGB - WikipediaThe KGB, translated in English as Committee for State Security, was the secret police that was the main security agency for the Soviet Union from 1954 until the Dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. As a direct successor of preceding agencies such as the Cheka, NKGB, NKVD and MGB, the committee was attached to the Council of Ministers.Cheka - WikipediaThe All-Russian Extraordinary Commission, abbreviated VChK, and commonly known as Cheka, was the first of a succession of Soviet secret-police organizations. Established on December 5 1917 by the Sovnarkom, it came under the leadership of Felix Dzerzhinsky, a Polish aristocrat-turned-communist. By late 1918 hundreds of Cheka committees had sprung up in the RSFSR at the oblast, guberniya, raion, uyezd, and volost levels.NKVD - WikipediaThe People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs, abbreviated NKVD, was the interior ministry of the Soviet Union. Established in 1917 as NKVD of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, the agency was originally tasked with conducting regular police work and overseeing the country's prisons and labor camps.Stasi - WikipediaThe Ministry for State Security or State Security Service, commonly known as the Stasi, was the official state security service of the German Democratic Republic. It has been described as one of the most effective and repressive intelligence and secret police agencies ever to have existed.Antisemitism in the Soviet Union - WikipediaThe 1917 Russian Revolution overthrew a centuries-old regime of official antisemitism in the Russian Empire, including its Pale of Settlement. However, the previous legacy of antisemitism was continued by the Soviet state, especially under Stalin, who spread anti-Jewish conspiracy theories through his propaganda network.Antisemitism in the Soviet Union reached new heights after 1948 during the campaign against the "rootless cosmopolitan", in which numerous Yiddish-writing poets, writers, painters and sculptors were killed or arrested. This culminated in the so-called Doctors' plot, in which a group of doctors were subjected to a show trial for supposedly having plotted to assassinate Stalin.Dekulakization - WikipediaDekulakization was the Soviet campaign of political repressions, including arrests, deportations, and executions of millions of kulaks and their families in the 1929–1932 period of the first five-year plan. To facilitate the expropriations of farmland, the Soviet government portrayed kulaks as class enemies of the USSR. More than 1.8 million peasants were deported in 1930–1931. The campaign had the stated purpose of fighting counter-revolution and of building socialism in the countryside. This policy, carried out simultaneously with collectivization in the Soviet Union, effectively brought all agriculture and all the laborers in Soviet Russia under state control. Hunger, disease and mass executions during dekulakization led to at least 530,000 to 600,000 deaths from 1929 to 1933, though higher estimates also exist, with historian Robert Conquest estimating in 1986 that 5 million people may have died. The results soon became known outside the Soviet Union.Red Terror Facts - 40 Spine-Chilling Facts You Should ...Do Europeans still feel hostility towards the Soviet Union?Perhaps, if your grandmother or a relative was gang raped and brutalized by the Red Army soldiers after the invasion or tortured and shot by the Soviet NKVD during Stalin’s reoccupation of eastern Europe.Rape during the occupation of Germany - WikipediaAs Allied troops entered and occupied German territory during the later stages of World War II, mass rapes of women took place both in connection with combat operations and during the subsequent occupation of Germany.Most Western scholars agree that the majority of the rapes were committed by Soviet servicemen, while some Russian historians maintain that these crimes were not widespread.Yalta Conference - WikipediaThe Yalta Conference, also known as the Crimea Conference and code-named the Argonaut Conference, held February 4–11, 1945, was the World War II meeting of the heads of government of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union to discuss the postwar reorganization of Germany and Europe.Berlin Wall - WikipediaThe Berlin Wall was a guarded concrete barrier that physically and ideologically divided Berlin from 1961 to 1989. Construction of the wall was commenced by the German Democratic Republic on 13 August 1961. The Wall cut off West Berlin from surrounding East Germany, including East Berlin.I feel that we now have all the knowledge we require to constructively learn and piece together the era of the WW2 and National Socialism in Germany, it’s policies as well as it’s politics.Also to have a clear understanding of how the National Socialist apparatus functioned and operated.Nazism - WikipediaNational Socialism, more commonly known as Nazism, is the ideology and practices associated with the Nazi Party—officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party—in Nazi Germany, and of other far-right groups with similar ideas and aims.National Socialism, more commonly known as Nazism, is the ideology and practices associated with the Nazi Party—officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party—in Nazi Germany, and of other far-right groups with similar ideas and aims.Reichstag fire - WikipediaThe Reichstag fire was an arson attack on the Reichstag building, home of the German parliament in Berlin, on Monday 27 February 1933, precisely four weeks after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany.Reichstag Fire Decree - WikipediaThe Reichstag Fire Decree is the common name of the Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State issued by German President Paul von Hindenburg on the advice of Chancellor Adolf Hitler on 28 February 1933 in immediate response to the Reichstag fire.Sturmabteilung - WikipediaThe Sturmabteilung, literally Storm Detachment, was the Nazi Party's original paramilitary wing. It played a significant role in Adolf Hitler's rise to power in the 1920s and 1930sBeer Hall Putsch - WikipediaThe Beer Hall Putsch, also known as the Munich Putsch, and, in German, as the Hitlerputsch, Hitler-Ludendorff-Putsch, Bürgerbräu-Putsch or Marsch auf die Feldherrnhalle, was a failed coup d'état by the Nazi Party leader Adolf Hitler—along with Generalquartiermeister Erich Ludendorff and other Kampfbund leaders—to seize power in Munich, Bavaria, which took place on 8–9 November 1923.Der Stürmer - WikipediaDer Stürmer was a weekly German tabloid-format newspaper published from 1923 to the end of World War II by Julius Streicher, the Gauleiter of Franconia, with brief suspensions in publication due to legal difficulties. It was a significant part of Nazi propaganda, and was virulently antisemitic.Stab-in-the-back myth - WikipediaThe stab-in-the-back myth was the notion, widely believed and promulgated in right-wing circles in Germany after 1918, that the German Army did not lose World War I on the battlefield but was instead betrayed by the civilians on the home front, especially the republicans who overthrew the Hohenzollern monarchy in the German Revolution of 1918–19.Freikorps - WikipediaFreikorps were irregular German military volunteer units that existed from the 18th to the early 20th centuries, which effectively fought as mercenary or private armies, regardless of their own nationality. In German-speaking countries, the first so-called Freikorps were formed in the 18th century from native volunteers, enemy renegades and deserters.Nazi Party - WikipediaThe National Socialist German Workers' Party, commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party, was a far-right political party in Germany that was active between 1920 and 1945, that created and supported the ideology of National Socialism. Its precursor, the German Workers' Party, existed from 1919 to 1920.Law in Nazi Germany - WikipediaFrom 1933 to 1945, the Nazi regime ruled Germany and controlled much of Europe. During this time, Nazi Germany shifted from the post-World War I society which characterized the Weimar Republic and introduced an ideology of "biological racism" into the country's legal and justicial systems.Nazi concentration camps - WikipediaFrom 1933 to 1945, Nazi Germany operated more than a thousand concentration camps on its own territory and in parts of German-occupied Europe. The first camps were established in March 1933 immediately after Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany.List of Nazi concentration camps - WikipediaConcentration camps served primarily as detention and slave labor exploitation centers. An estimated 15 to 20 million people were imprisoned in 42,500 camps and ghettos, and often pressed into slavery during the subsequent years.The system of about 20,000 concentration camps in Germany and German-occupied Europe played a pivotal role in economically sustaining the German reign of terror.Most of them were destroyed by the Germans in an attempt to hide the evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity; nevertheless tens of thousands of prisoners sent on death marches were liberated by the Allies afterward.Extermination camps were designed and built exclusively to kill prisoners on a massive scale, often immediately upon arrival.The extermination camps of Operation Reinhard such as Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka served as "death factories" in which German SS and police murdered nearly 2,700,000 Jews by asphyxiation with poison gas, shooting, and extreme work under starvation conditions.The concentration camps held large groups of prisoners without trial or judicial process. In modern historiography, the term refers to a place of systemic mistreatment, starvation, forced labour and murder.Untermensch - WikipediaUntermensch is a Nazi term for non-Aryan "inferior people" often referred to as "the masses from the East", that is Jews, Roma, and Slavs – mainly Poles, Serbs, and later also Russians. The term was also applied to Blacks, Mulattos and Finn-Asian.Master race - WikipediaThe master race is a concept in Nazi ideology in which the putative Nordic or Aryan races, predominant among Germans and other northern European peoples, are deemed the highest in racial hierarchy. Members of this alleged master race were referred to as Herrenmenschen.Pan-Germanism - WikipediaPan-Germanism, also occasionally known as Pan-Germanicism, is a pan-nationalist political idea. Pan-Germanists originally sought to unify all the German speaking people – and possibly also Germanic-speaking peoples – in a single nation-state known as Großdeutschland.Volksdeutsche - Wikipedian Nazi German terminology, Volksdeutsche were "people whose language and culture had German origins but who did not hold German citizenship". The term is the nominalised plural of volksdeutsch, with Volksdeutsche denoting a singular female, and Volksdeutsche, a singular male.Nazi Germany - WikipediaNazi Germany, officially known as the German Reich until 1943 and Greater German Reich in 1943–45, was the German state between 1933 and 1945, when Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party controlled the country which they transformed into a dictatorship.Nazism and race - WikipediaNazism and race concerns the Nazi Party's adoption and further development of several hypotheses concerning their concept of race. Classifications of human races were made and various measurements of population samples were carried out during the 1930s.Scientific racism - WikipediaScientific racism, sometimes termed biological racism, is the pseudoscientific belief that empirical evidence exists to support or justify racism, racial inferiority, or racial superiority. Historically, scientific racism received credence throughout the scientific community, but it is no longer considered scientific.Ideology of the SS - WikipediaThe ideology espoused by the Schutzstaffel, a paramilitary force and instrument of terror of the Nazi Party in Nazi Germany, emphasized a racist vision of "racial purity", antisemitism, and loyalty to Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. SS men were indoctrinated with the belief they were members of a "master race".The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - WikipediaThe Protocols of the Elders of Zion or The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion is a fabricated antisemitic text purporting to describe a Jewish plan for global domination.Eugenics - WikipediaEugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population, historically by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior. The concept predates the term; Plato suggested applying the principles of selective breeding to humans around 400 BC.Hitler Youth - WikipediaThe Hitler Youth was the youth organisation of the Nazi Party in Germany. Its origins dated back to 1922 and it received the name Hitler-Jugend, Bund deutscher Arbeiterjugend in July 1926.League of German Girls - WikipediaThe League of German Girls or Band of German Maidens was the girls' wing of the Nazi Party youth movement, the Hitler Youth. It was the only legal female youth organization in Nazi Germany. At first, the League consisted of two sections: the Jungmädelbund for girls aged 10 to 14, and the League proper for girls aged 14 to 18.Ahnenpass - WikipediaThe Ahnenpaß documented the Aryan lineage of citizens of Nazi Germany. It was one of the forms of the Aryan certificate and issued by the "Reich Association of Marriage Registrars in Germany". The term Aryan in this context was used in a sense widely accepted in scientific racism of the time, which assumed a Caucasian race which was sub-divided into Semitic, Hamitic and Aryan subraces, the latter corresponding to the Indo-European language family; the Nazi ideology limited the category Aryan to certain subgroups, while excluding Slavs as non-Aryan.Nuremberg Laws - WikipediaThe Nuremberg Laws were antisemitic and racist laws in Nazi Germany. They were enacted by the Reichstag on 15 September 1935, at a special meeting convened during the annual Nuremberg Rally of the Nazi Party.Rassenschande - WikipediaRassenschande or Blutschande was an anti-miscegenation concept in Nazi German racial policy, pertaining to sexual relations between Aryans and non-Aryans. It was put into practice by policies like the Aryan certificate requirement, and later the Nuremberg Laws, adopted unanimously by the Reichstag on 15 September 1935.Gestapo - WikipediaThe Geheime Staatspolizei, abbreviated Gestapo, was the official secret police of Nazi Germany and German-occupied Europe. The force was created by Hermann Göring in 1933 by combining the various security police agencies of Prussia into one organisation.Sicherheitsdienst - WikipediaSicherheitsdienst, full title Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsführers-SS, or SD, was the intelligence agency of the SS and the Nazi Party in Nazi Germany. Originating in 1931, the organization was the first Nazi intelligence organization to be established and was considered a sister organization with the Gestapo through integration of SS members and operational procedures.Ahnenerbe - WikipediaThe Ahnenerbe operated as a think tank in Nazi Germany between 1935 and 1945. Heinrich Himmler, the Reichsführer of the Schutzstaffel established it as an SS appendage devoted to the task of promoting the racial doctrines espoused by Adolf Hitler and his governing Nazi Party, specifically by supporting the idea that the modern Germans descended from an ancient Aryan race seen as biologically superior to other racial groups.Lebensraum - WikipediaThe German concept of Lebensraum comprises policies and practices of settler colonialism which proliferated in Germany from the 1890s to the 1940s. First popularized around 1901, Lebensraum became a geopolitical goal of Imperial Germany in World War I originally, as the core element of the Septemberprogramm of territorial expansion.Generalplan Ost - WikipediaThe Generalplan Ost, abbreviated GPO, was the Nazi German government's plan for the genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale, and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans. It was to be undertaken in territories occupied by Germany during World War II.Lebensborn - WikipediaLebensborn e.V. was an SS-initiated, state-supported, registered association in Nazi Germany with the goal of raising the birth rate of Aryan children of persons classified as 'racially pure' and 'healthy' based on Nazi racial hygiene and health ideology.Führerprinzip - WikipediaThe Führerprinzip prescribed the fundamental basis of political authority in the governmental structures of the Third Reich. This principle can be most succinctly understood to mean that "the Führer's word is above all written law" and that governmental policies, decisions, and offices ought to work toward the realization of this end.Aktion T4 - WikipediaAktion T4 was a postwar name for mass murder by involuntary euthanasia in Nazi Germany. The name T4 is an abbreviation of Tiergartenstraße 4, a street address of the Chancellery department set up in early 1940, in the Berlin borough of Tiergarten, which recruited and paid personnel associated with T4.Nazi human experimentation - WikipediaNazi human experimentation was a series of medical experiments on large numbers of prisoners, including children, by Nazi Germany in its concentration camps in the early to mid 1940s, during World War II and the Holocaust. Chief target populations included Romani, Sinti, ethnic Poles, Soviet POWs, disabled Germans, and Jews from across Europe.Germanisation - WikipediaGermanisation, or Germanization, is the spread of the German language, people and culture. It was a central plank of German conservative thinking in the 19th and 20th centuries, during a period when conservatism and ethno-nationalism went hand-in-hand.Kidnapping of children by Nazi Germany - WikipediaKidnapping of foreign children by Nazi Germany, part of the Generalplan Ost, involved taking children regarded as "Aryan-looking" from the rest of Europe and moving them to Nazi Germany for the purpose of Germanization, or indoctrination into becoming culturally German.Nur für Deutsche - WikipediaThe slogan Nur für Deutsche was during World War II, in many German-occupied countries, a German ethnocentric slogan indicating that certain establishments and transportation were reserved for Germans. Signs bearing the slogan were posted at entrances to parks, cafes, cinemas, theaters and other facilities.Kristallnacht - WikipediaKristallnacht or the Night of Broken Glass, also called the November Pogrom, was a pogrom against Jews carried out by SA paramilitary forces and civilians throughout Nazi Germany on 9–10 November 1938. The German authorities looked on without intervening.History of the Jews in Germany - WikipediaThe history of the Jews in Germany goes back to the Early Middle Ages and High Middle Ages when Jewish settlers founded the Ashkenazi Jewish community. The community survived under Charlemagne, but suffered during the Crusades.Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses - WikipediaThe Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany began on April 1, 1933, and was claimed to be a defensive reaction to the Anti-Nazi Boycott, which had been initiated in March 1933. It was largely unsuccessful, as the German population continued to use Jewish businesses, but revealed the intent of the Nazis to undermine the viability of Jews in Germany.Operation Barbarossa - WikipediaOperation Barbarossa was the code name for the Axis invasion of the Soviet Union, which started on Sunday, 22 June 1941, during World War II. The operation put into action Nazi Germany's ideological goal of conquering the western Soviet Union so as to repopulate it with Germans.Invasion of Poland - WikipediaThe invasion of Poland, marked the beginning of World War II. The German invasion began on 1 September 1939, one week after the signing of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union, and one day after the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union had approved the pact.World War II - WikipediaWorld War II, also known as the Second World War, was a global war that lasted from 1939 to 1945. The vast majority of the world's countries—including all the great powers—eventually formed two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis.Anschluss - WikipediaThe Anschluss, also known as the Anschluss Österreichs, refers to the annexation of Austria into Nazi Germany on 12 March 1938. The idea of an Anschluss began after the unification of Germany excluded Austria and the German Austrians from the Prussian-dominated German Empire in 1871.Night of the Long Knives - WikipediaThe Night of the Long Knives, or the Röhm Purge, also called Operation Hummingbird, was a purge that took place in Nazi Germany from June 30 to July 2, 1934.Paragraph 175 - WikipediaParagraph 175 was a provision of the German Criminal Code from 15 May 1871 to 10 March 1994. It made homosexual acts between males a crime, and in early revisions the provision also criminalized bestiality as well as forms of prostitution and underage sexual abuse.The Nazis broadened the law in 1935; in the prosecutions that followed, thousands died in concentration camps as a widespread social persecution of homosexuals took place.The Holocaust - WikipediaThe Holocaust, also known as the Shoah, was the World War II genocide of the European Jews. Between 1941 and 1945, across German-occupied Europe, Nazi Germany and its collaborators systematically murdered some six million Jews, around two-thirds of Europe's Jewish population.Yellow badge - WikipediaYellow badges, also referred to as Jewish badges, are badges that Jews were ordered to wear in public during periods of the Middle Ages by the ruling Christians and Muslims, and in Nazi Germany. The badges served to mark the wearer as a religious or ethnic outsider, and often served as a badge of shame.German resistance to Nazism - WikipediaGerman resistance to Nazism was the opposition by individuals and groups in Germany to the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945. Some of these engaged in active resistance, including attempts to remove Adolf Hitler from power by assassination and overthrow his regime.List of Germans who resisted Nazism - WikipediaReligion in Nazi Germany - WikipediaIn 1933, 5 years prior to the annexation of Austria into Germany, the population of Germany was approximately 67% Protestant and 33% Catholic, while the Jewish population was less than 1%. A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era and after the annexation of mostly Catholic Austria and mostly Catholic Czechoslovakia into Germany, indicates that 54% considered themselves Protestant, 40% Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as Gottgläubig, and 1.5% as "atheist". Smaller religious minorities such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Bahá'í Faith were banned in Germany, while the eradication of Judaism by the genocide of its adherents was attempted. The Salvation Army, the Christian Saints and the Seventh-day Adventist Church all disappeared from Germany, while astrologers, healers, fortune tellers, and witchcraft were banned.However, the small pagan "German Faith Movement" supported the Nazis. Nazi ranks had people of varied religious leanings.Catholic Church and Nazi Germany - WikipediaPopes Pius XI and Pius XII led the Catholic Church during the rise and fall of Nazi Germany. Around a third of Germans were Catholic in the 1930s, generally in southern Germany; Protestants dominated the north. Although the German Catholic church had opposed the Nazi Party, the Catholic-aligned Centre Party capitulated in 1933.Rosenstrasse protest - WikipediaThe Rosenstrasse protest was a collective street protest on Rosenstraße in Berlin during February and March 1943. This demonstration was initiated and sustained by the non-Jewish wives and relatives of Jewish men and mischling who had been arrested and targeted for deportation, based on the racial policy of Nazi Germany.Nazi book burnings - WikipediaThe Nazi book burnings were a campaign conducted by the German Student Union to ceremonially burn books in Nazi Germany and Austria in the 1930s. The books targeted for burning were those viewed as being subversive or as representing ideologies opposed to Nazism.Mischling - WikipediaMischling was the legal term used in Nazi Germany to denote persons deemed to have both Aryan and Jewish ancestry. The Germanic root is cousin to the Latin term whence the Spanish term mestizo and French term métis originate. In German, the word has the general denotation of hybrid, mongrel, or half-breed.Werner Goldberg - WikipediaGoldberg's father grew up in Königsberg as a member of the Jewish community but he had himself baptized in the local Lutheran church as he wished to become assimilated and marry a Christian. Werner had no idea his father was Jewish; he and his brother Martin (born 1920) had been baptized in the Grünewald Lutheran Church at their father's request. After Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, the senior Goldberg lost his position under the Nazi law of April 1933, Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service, which expelled Jews from the German Civil Service.The 1935 Nuremberg Laws classed persons with at least three Jewish grandparents as Jewish; those with two Jewish grandparents would be considered Jewish only if they practiced the faith or had a Jewish spouse.Goldberg left school in 1935 and became an apprentice at Schneller und Schmeider, a clothing company jointly owned by a Jew and a non-Jew, where many of his colleagues were Jews or Mischlinge. Goldberg's maternal uncle joined the Nazi party and refused to be seen with the Goldberg family, even avoiding Goldberg's mother.At the beginning of 1938, Goldberg served a six-month term in the Reich Labour Service whose uniform, as Goldberg later recalled, "had a swastika on an armband". On December 1, 1938, Goldberg joined the German Army. He took part in the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, serving alongside childhood friend Karl Wolf, whose father was now a high-ranking SS officer.Shortly after the beginning of the war, Goldberg's photograph appeared in the Sunday edition of the Berliner Tagesblatt newspaper with the caption "The ideal German soldier" ("Der ideale deutsche Soldat"); the photograph had been sold to the newspaper by the official army photographer. It was later used on recruitment posters.In 1940, following the Armistice with France, Goldberg was expelled from the army under Hitler's order of April 8, 1940, which stated that all first-degree Mischlinge were to be discharged from the military. He returned to his former workplace, which had now changed its name to Feodor Schmeider, having been obliged to remove the Jewish name Schneller. Goldberg played an increasingly more responsible role within the company, obtaining contracts for uniforms from the army and the navy. He also attended the Reich Committee for Labour Studies school (Reichsausschuss für Arbeitsstudien, RAFA), where he was one of the four out of 80 students who passed the test to become a REFA teacher. He then became a Labour Studies Board lecturer on the clothing industry, and delivered lectures to organizations and company directors, even publishing an article in the weekly trade publication Textilwoche.In December 1942, Goldberg's father was admitted to hospital. The Gestapo, however, raided the hospital and sent him to a Jewish one which had been requisitioned by the Gestapo for use as a prison, from which Jews were taken and sent to Auschwitz. On Christmas Eve, gambling that the guards would be drunk or absent, Goldberg took his father from the hospital. The elder Goldberg was soon back in the hands of the Gestapo, and in April 1943 was summoned for deportation; Werner told him not to show up, and he was again saved. The father and son were the only members of their immediate family to survive the war.Werner Goldberg later joined the Christian Democratic Union of Germany and served twenty years between 1959 and 1979 as a politician in the Abgeordnetenhaus of Berlin. He died in Berlin on September 28, 2004, aged 84; he was survived by his wife Gertrud Goldberg, and three children.List of victims of Nazism - WikipediaThe history of National Socialism and the WW2 is a rather complex subject and must be studied with a certain level of objectivity.In contrast we know very little about the function, ins and outs of the Soviet Red Terror apparatus, the Soviet leadership was not as organized in keeping and tracking data, as the Nazi leadership was, as a result there is data that is still missing and inconclusive.Putin’s unwillingness to officially open the Soviet KGB archives to the public and to publicize the names of the NKVD top chiefs and executioners shows that Russia is not willing to cooperate and fully acknowledge it’s dark past.To summarize.Germans took full responsibility and acknowledged the crimes committed by the National Socialist govt.The Arolsen archives are open to the public, are available online and accessible world wide.Arolsen Archives - International Center on Nazi PersecutionRussians on the other hand failed to learn from the past.The Russian leadership continues to find excuses and justification for Stalin’s Red Terror, turning victims into perpetrators and perpetrators into victims.PS!History does not care about personal feelings, only Facts matter.

The United States has supported DICTATORS, right wing Governments as well as countries like Saudis Arabia and has overthrown governments like Iran for over 70 years.The countries the US supported as in Saudis Arabia from the 40s till now have subjected their people. As long as the US got oil and gas and other natural resources, they looked the other way as they subjugated their own people with money and weapons that the US used to prop these countries up.The ideology of Muslim terrorists are wahhabism. That version of Sunni Islamic was created in Saudis Arabia and exported around the world. Any other version of Islam was killed off.Go to any country and visit a mosque. If it says paid by the Saudis Government that it means the wahhabis ideology was taught there.AL QAEDA follows wahhabism that Osama bin laden has been a follower of.It was in the news that ISIS were using Saudis Arabian textbooks to teach their own children.[House Hearing, 115 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]    SAUDI ARABIA'S TROUBLING EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM  =======================================================================   HEARING   BEFORE THE   SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NONPROLIFERATION, AND TRADE   OF THE   COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS  HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES   ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS   FIRST SESSION   __________   JULY 19, 2017   __________   Serial No. 115-46   __________   Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/   or   http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/   ______      U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE  26-312PDF WASHINGTON : 2017    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,  http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,  U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).  E-mail, [email protected]                 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS   EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina AMI BERA, California MO BROOKS, Alabama LOIS FRANKEL, Florida PAUL COOK, California TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas RON DeSANTIS, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania TED S. YOHO, Florida DINA TITUS, Nevada ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois NORMA J. TORRES, California LEE M. ZELDIN, New York BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois DANIEL M. DONOVAN, Jr., New York THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York  Wisconsin TED LIEU, California ANN WAGNER, Missouri BRIAN J. MAST, Florida FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia   Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director   Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director    ------    Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade   TED POE, Texas, Chairman JOE WILSON, South Carolina WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts DARRELL E. ISSA, California LOIS FRANKEL, Florida PAUL COOK, California BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania DINA TITUS, Nevada LEE M. ZELDIN, New York NORMA J. TORRES, California BRIAN J. MAST, Florida BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia    C O N T E N T S   ----------   Page   WITNESSES  Ms. Nina Shea, director, Center for Religious Freedom, Hudson   Institute...................................................... 4 David A. Weinberg, Ph.D., senior fellow, Foundation for Defense   of Democracies................................................. 14 The Honorable Frank Wolf, distinguished senior fellow, 21st   Century Wilberforce Initiative (former U.S. Representative).... 34 Douglas Johnston, Ph.D., president emeritus, International Center   for Religion and Diplomacy..................................... 40   LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING  Ms. Nina Shea: Prepared statement................................ 7 David A. Weinberg, Ph.D.: Prepared statement..................... 16 The Honorable Frank Wolf: Prepared statement..................... 37 Douglas Johnston, Ph.D.: Prepared statement...................... 42   APPENDIX  Hearing notice................................................... 62 Hearing minutes.................................................. 63 David A. Weinberg, Ph.D.: Material submitted for the record...... 64 The Honorable Frank Wolf: Material submitted for the record...... 72     SAUDI ARABIA'S TROUBLING EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM   ----------     WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2017   House of Representatives,    Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade,   Committee on Foreign Affairs,   Washington, DC.   The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:15 p.m., in  room 2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ted Poe (chairman  of the subcommittee) presiding.  Mr. Poe. The subcommittee will now come to order.  Without objection, all members may have 5 days to submit  statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record,  subject to the limitation in the rules.  The Chair will ask that the witnesses come forward and sit  in your designated positions.  The Chair has distributed to all members an expert from-- excerpts from current textbooks published by Saudi Arabia's  Ministry of Education. The Chair would ask and direct that the  staff furnish this material to all of the witnesses at this  time.  Saudi Arabia is an ally in the fight against terrorism.  Many of the same terrorist organizations that threaten the United States also desire to overthrow the Saudi Government and  break our partnership with the government. It is a key member of the Coalition to Fight ISIS, with its pilots flying alongside Americans since day one of the campaign in Syria.  Last year Saudi Arabia adopted strict laws prohibiting fundraising for terrorism, jointly designated support networks  for al-Qaeda and the Taliban.  However, the Saudis still have much more they need to do at home to counter the sources of extremism in the region. The  battle against terrorism will ultimately have to be fought and won on the battlefield of ideas. Saudi Arabia has simply not done enough to defeat extremist ideology.  The Kingdom is playing the role of both arsonist and  firefighter when it comes to Islamic extremism. Nowhere is this more evident than the textbooks Saudi Arabia produces to teach  young people. For too long, Saudi Arabia's education curriculum  has inspired the very ideology that is at the root of many terrorist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Saudi textbooks  are full of anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories, and calls to violence that have incited students both at home and across the  world.  This poisonous ideology has provided the groundwork for generations of extremism. In fact, ISIS adopted official Saudi textbooks for its schools in 2015 until that terrorist organization could publish its own textbooks. However, its  export of hateful material through Saudi-funded schools abroad  has helped spread the toxic ideology to more tolerant and open Muslim communities in countries such as Kosovo and Indonesia.  While the Kingdom has repeatedly pledged to remove  extremist content from its curriculum, troubling language  remains in many of the most recent editions of Saudi textbooks.  In 2006, the Saudis committed to eliminate all passages that promoted hatred toward any religion by 2008. Yet even today, years later, textbooks include content that discourages befriending infidels, claims the goal of Zionism is world domination, and encourages fighting any infidel who refuses to  submit to the supremacy of Islam. This intolerance is  unacceptable and directly contributes to the widespread  persecution of religious minorities that plague the Middle  East.  Another passage in a current Saudi textbook for middle school students states that ``the mujahideen who are doing good deeds for the sake of Allah . . . should be given transportation, weapons, food, and anything else that they may  need to continue their jihad.'' Messages such as this undermine  the Saudi's own counterterrorism efforts. By indoctrinating  children into the belief that the people of other faiths are inferior or that are a threat to Islam, Saudi Arabia is ensuring future generations of extremists that will join the  ranks of terrorist groups.  This is not to ignore that some positive steps have been taken. In recent years, the Kingdom has introduced passages that denounce terrorism and encourage dialogue with other faiths. But these steps only send mixed messages to easily  influenced young minds so as long as those more extreme  messages remain.  The State Department has previously in other  administrations, failed to hold Saudi Arabiacounterparts to past pledges. The Saudi--the State Department has even refused to publish reports that shed light on these troubling textbooks  for fear of embarrassing our Saudi partners, information that they have in the possession of the State Department. This is  troubling.  While we appreciate Saudi Arabia's contribution to our  overall counterterrorism efforts in the region, we must hold  them accountable for their role in fueling the very extremism that we are both trying to combat. It is in both of our countries' interests in the fight against terrorism. We all  need to be on the same page. And that is just the way it is.  I will yield from the gentleman from Massachusetts Mr. Keating, the ranking member, for his opening statement.  Mr. Keating. Thank you, Chairman Poe, for holding this  hearing. And thank you to our witnesses for being here. Mr.  Wolf, welcome back.  We have dedicated a lot of time in this subcommittee with talks of countering terrorism and violent extremism. Our last  hearing addressed that very issue in Europe, in light of the  many attacks carried out against so many innocent civilians across the region.  We are here to discuss the issue in the context of Saudi Arabia's school curriculum, and in particular, reforms that  have been made to ensure children just going to school are not  being trained in intolerance and violence but, also  importantly, to identify what work still must be done. The  spread of extremist ideologies and instances of individuals being inspired to commit acts of terrorism has forced us to learn much, much more about the factors that make individuals vulnerable to committing acts of violence and taking human  lives.  We realize that the messages these individuals are exposed to can change the course of their lives and push them to carry out heinous crimes of their own in their own communities, and  in those communities they may have never known, but their  actions have led to dehumanization, and they actually come to believe legitimate targets of violence are their victims.  These materials that our future generations spend every day of the most formative years of their lives learning from are  therefore very important. Texts that dehumanize and condone violence against others simply cannot be tolerated.  Saudi Arabia is an ally of the United States in fighting terrorism. And if there is ever to be a lasting peace and security in the Middle East it will require every country in the region stepping up and being a leader in eradicating  extremism and promoting the institutions and rule of law needed to ensure that such hatred and violent ideologies are never again permitted to take root or to spread.  Today I hope to learn more from our witnesses about the reforms and progress the Kingdom has already made, what existing challenges lie before us and, specifically, how we in Congress can support progress in this regard. Every year that  goes by children are being taught intolerance. And that  compounds the challenges we will face in creating a safer world for them to grow up in going forward.  So, I am looking forward to today's hearing about the steps that can be made sure to take these materials molding our future generations and bringing them forward, not only in Saudi  Arabia but in communities around the world. We all have forms of intolerance, and we all must work to remove these from our own countries. This must be achieved as quickly as possible, however. We cannot afford to be patient while intolerance that  promotes or condones violence in any form is not only shared but taught and continues to undermine our collective efforts to  protect communities from terrorism and violent extremism.  Again I would like to thank our witnesses and I yield back.  Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts.  Do any other members wish to be recognized?  [No response.]  Mr. Poe. Seeing none, without objection all witnesses'  prepared statements will be made part of the record. I ask that each witness please keep your presentation to no more than 5 minutes. If you see a red light that appears before you, that means stop. And we do have your statements and all members have had access to those statements for some time.  I will introduce each witness and then give them time for their opening statements.  Ms. Nina Shea is the director of the Center for Religious  Freedom at the Hudson Institute. Previously she was appointed by the United States House of Representatives to serve seven terms as a commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International  Religious Freedom.  Dr. David Weinberg is a senior fellow at the Foundation for  Defense of Democracies. Prior to joining the FDD, he served as Democratic professional staff member at the House Committee on  Foreign Affairs.  The Honorable Frank Wolf served, God bless you, 17 terms in the United States House of Representatives. His now a distinguished senior fellow at the 21st Century Wilberforce  Initiative.  And Dr. Douglas Johnston is the president emeritus and  founder of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy.  Prior to his current position he served as vice president and COO of Center for Strategic and International Studies.  Ms. Shea, we will start with you. You have 5 minutes.   STATEMENT OF MS. NINA SHEA, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR RELIGIOUS   FREEDOM, HUDSON INSTITUTE   Ms. Shea. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the  committee.  This is an important hearing. It comes at a critical time  when Saudi Arabia itself is expressing a new vision for itself  of reform. And many thoughtful voices after 9/11 made a  connection between the fact that most of the perpetrators and  the mastermind behind those attacks were from Saudi Arabia, and  that their educational system could have a lot to do with what  happened that day.  The Saudis--the Saudi King--back in 2003 convened his own  panel to examine the Saudi textbooks and they confirmed some of  our worst fears. And they found that the Saudi Kingdom, and I  am quoting, ``religious studies curriculum encourages violence  with others and misguides the people into believing that in  order to safeguard their own religion they must violently  repress and even physically eliminate the others.''  For 15 years after 9/11 Saudi Ministry of Education  textbooks still teach an ideology of hatred and violence  against Jews, Christians, other Muslims such as Shiites, Sufis  and Amadiyyas, Hindus, Baha'is, Yezidis, animists, sorcerers,  and infidels of all stripes, as well as other groups with  different beliefs. The most objectionable passages are from the  upper grades' religious textbooks.  While the Saudi Government has made much of reform in the  early grades, those religious texts, like those for math or  English, have not been particularly problematic, though overall  critical thinking and ideas that conflict with the government- approved ones are banned.  Each academic year the Ministry of Education issues a new  edition of grades 1 through 12's religious textbooks. And they  are mandatory in all Saudi public schools. Each edition  reflects some changes in wording, content, and placement.  Nevertheless, over the past some 10 years, the content, that I  have been looking at these books, the content has continued to  retain violent passages and directives.  Christians, Hindus, and those practicing witchcraft are to  be fought and killed. The textbooks incite violence against  polytheists, a category that would of course include all non- monotheistic religions, but in Saudi Wahhabi teaching can  include monotheistic religions too, such as Christianity.  Christians are also considered infidels who must be fought  unless they have a protection contract with Muslims. Conspiracy  theories are taught as fact about the Freemasons, the Rotary  Club, the Lion's Club, the American University of Beirut, and  so on.  Dogmatic lessons in Saudi middle and high school textbooks  include that many--instruct that many Muslims should be killed  for their beliefs, including blasphemers, Christian converts,  and those who merely doubt the Prophet's truth, as well as  Shiites and Sufis, who are condemned as polytheists for praying  or even seen crying at gravesites.  No group, however, is more vilified than the Jews. The  problem is far deeper than that conveyed by the State  Department's characterization of it as simply stereotypical or  anti-Semitic language. Repeatedly Jews are demonized,  dehumanized, and targeted for violence. The textbooks instruct  that the Zionist aim is Jewish domination of the world and  controlling its destiny.  When I was in Saudi Arabia in 2011 with the U.S. Commission  on International Religious Freedom I had a chance to ask the  Saudi justice minister at the time why the Protocols of the  Elders of Zion, an infamously anti-Semitic fabrication from the  Russian revolution, is included in the textbooks on Hadith,  which is the traditions of Islam's Prophet Mohammed, where it  continues to be taught as historical fact. He responded that  the Protocols are treated as part of Islamic culture because it  is a book that has long been found in plentiful supply in Saudi  Arabia and that it was a book that his father had in his house.  In the interests of time I am going to refer to my written  testimony for specific examples. You have already cited a few.  But just to say that apostates are singled out for  punishment in this life, death unless they repent within 3  days.  Christians, again, are considered polytheists, and  polytheists are to be--is a reason to fight those who practice  it and to commit jihad against it, is another quote from these  books.  Homosexuals, the punishment is death.  Jihad is extolled and defined. Its first definition is  asserting effort in fighting unbelievers and tyrants.  And there are many more examples. And these are posted on  the Internet and shipped worldwide. And they have been linked  by our counterterrorism officials to growing extremism.  The Saudis, the one point I would like to make is that the  Saudis themselves have admitted that the textbooks need reform.  They do not deny it. Any Saudi that I talked to has agreed,  including the Saudi Minister of Education in 2011, but they  have not really finished it. They have never finished it. And  they have a long history of broken promises where they have  said that they did; either they did clean them up, as our  Ambassador to Washington, former Ambassador Turki al-Faisal  told us, or that the reform is just around the corner and that  it will be completed in 2 years or 5 years or 10 years. And  over this period it has not happened.  The government--U.S. Government--has failed to verify this.  And has even, as you mentioned, covered it up.  So, I will conclude my testimony there and urge you to  mandate that Congress, mandate--that Congress mandate the State  Department review the textbooks and highlight and detail the  troublesome portions of it. And to, even to make defense  contracts with Saudi Arabia contingent on the cleanup of these  textbooks and so that they are not in danger of hurting or  killing any American that might be a member of the groups that  are singled out for violence and dehumanization in these  reports.  Thank you.  [The prepared statement of Ms. Shea follows:]  [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    ----------    Mr. Poe. Thank you, Ms. Shea.  Dr. Weinberg.   STATEMENT OF DAVID A. WEINBERG, PH.D., SENIOR FELLOW,   FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES   Mr. Weinberg. Chairman Poe, Ranking Member Keating, and  distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you on behalf  of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies for having me here  today. I will deliver an abridged version of my written  testimony.  As I explain in that text, encouraging Saudi Arabia to  remove incitement from its government-published textbooks for  its public education system is not just the right thing to do,  it is also a national security issue. Fighting terrorists  militarily can only achieve so much if Saudi textbooks and  other sources of incitement continue to provide fertile  intellectual ground for violent extremism.  This past May I published a long list of intolerant  statements in Saudi textbooks from the most current school  year, which I will draw from extensively here. I have included  all of these passages in their original Arabic as an appendix  to my written testimony.  I found that Saudi textbooks still recommend killing people  for many acts that U.S. law would characterize as personal  choices. That included adultery, anal sex, converting from  Islam, or purported acts of sorcery.  The textbooks are also rife with anti-Christian and  particularly anti-Semitic inciting, often framed as anti- Zionism. One book called Christianity an invalid, perverted  religion. Another accused Zionism of plotting a global Jewish  government. And a third called Zionism an octopus that it  accused, falsely, of trying to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and  the entire Islamic creed.  A fourth book taught that befriending infidels is  forbidden, citing a Quranic verse that says not to take  Christians or Jews as allies. That textbook called such  infidels enemies of Muslims and of God, and taught that Muslims  must abhor them, quite literally teaching hatred.  These are all examples from current textbooks used in the  2016 to 2017 Saudi school year.  According to a forthcoming report by Human Rights Watch,  the textbooks also repeatedly refer to well-known stereotypes  of Shiite or Sufi Muslim rituals as horrendous examples of  polytheism. This is particularly important, because a passage I  found in a current Saudi textbook called for fighting such  polytheists except under a handful of extenuating  circumstances.  That book also teaches that there are four types of  infidels, and that if a non-believer doesn't happen to fit into  one of the first three categories--diplomats, peoples with whom  Muslims have a non-aggression treaty, or people who agree to  pay a special tax associated with second class status--then  they are combatant whom it says Muslims are commanded to fight.  Saudi Arabia has made some positive changes to its  textbooks in recent years but not enough. A few passages  condemning terrorism or racism and permitting kind treatment to  peaceful non-believers have been added. Direct calls to  violence or hatred are somewhat less common.  By the way, I would like to share a little bit of news with  you today. Seventeen minutes after this hearing was scheduled  to start the Saudi Embassy posted on Twitter that, ``The  Ministry of Education has finalized a round of textbook  revisions in line with the objectives of the national  transformation plan.'' This is particularly puzzling because in  an interview with the Wall Street Journal earlier this year  Saudi Arabia's education minister seemed to suggest that the  broader change involving incitement and other issues in its  curriculum would have to wait until 3 years, up to 3 years from  now when the Kingdom would move to tablets in the classroom.  Saudi officials routinely oversell the success and ambition  of their efforts to reform these books to date. In 2005 Saudi  Arabia said it had removed all the problematic passages from  its textbooks. When Nina Shea proved that that was incorrect,  the Saudis assured the U.S. that all intolerant passages would  be removed by 2008. They missed that deadline, as well as  others they had pledged for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Even  some of the textbooks they claim to have fixed in recent years  still contain incitement.  U.S. policy on this issue has not been up to the task. For  example, the State Department issued the country reports on  counterterrorism today. And while there are several lines in  there about the Saudi curriculum, there is only half, less than  a full sentence on what incitement still remains.  But there is much that Congress can do to help. The U.S.  Commission on International Religious Freedom called on the  executive branch this year to ``undertake and make public an  annual assessment'' of Saudi textbooks to ``determine if  passages that teach religious intolerance had been removed.''  Congress should help by passing legislation that requires the  administration to issue such a yearly report, and allocates the  resources of it to do so, no later than 90 days after the start  of the Saudi school year so such findings are actually still  valid for diplomats. And such a report should quote all such  passages that could be seen as encouraging violence or  intolerance for public scrutiny.  There are a number of other recommendations that I include  in my written testimony. But in the interests of time, I will  leave off there.  [The prepared statement of Mr. Weinberg follows:]  [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    ----------    Mr. Poe. Thank you, Dr. Weinberg.  The Chair will now recognize Congressman Wolf.   STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE FRANK WOLF, DISTINGUISHED SENIOR   FELLOW, 21ST CENTURY WILBERFORCE INITIATIVE (FORMER U.S.   REPRESENTATIVE)   Mr. Wolf. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the  committee.  The issue of Saudi educational curriculum as a means of  promoting intolerance and inspiring terrorism is not a new one.  This topic hit close to home in 2003, when Ahmed Omar Abu Ali  was arrested while in class at the Islamic University of Medina  for an attempted plot to assassinate President Bush. Before  attending the University of Medina, Mr. Abu Ali attended and  was a valedictorian at a high school which was located here in  northern Virginia, the Islamic Saudi Academy. Mr. Abu Ali was  ultimately sentenced to life in prison and is currently serving  out his sentence in a supermax in Colorado.  The reason I would like to highlight this particular case  in particular is due to the fact that concerns were raised  regarding the educational material being used by the Islamic  Saudi Academy over and over. Not only was the school funded by  the Saudi Arabian Embassy, which meant it fell under the Saudi  Ministry of Education, but the Saudi Ambassador to Washington  led the board of directors. He literally led the school.  In 2007 when asked by the United States Commission on  International Religious Freedom to make textbooks publicly  available, the school refused to comply. We got copies from a  professor that gave us one on the side. One letter from USCIRF  on the issue stated, ``Based on past documentation, significant  concerns remain about whether the Saudi textbooks used at the  ISA Academy explicitly . . . hate, intolerance and human rights  violations, and in some cases violence, which may adversely  affect the interests of the United States.''  In 2008, I wrote Secretary Rice on five different occasions  regarding the concerns held by the Commission regarding the  content of the textbooks. At that time I requested a meeting be  convened between relevant State Department officials, USCIRF  representatives, and expert analysts commissioned by USCIRF to  translate the textbooks in order to determine what was being  taught by the Academy. Such meeting never took place.  Generally, the State Department has been weak on this issue  in both Republican and in Democratic administrations.  During this time, USCIRF was finally able to obtain copies  of some of the textbooks being used by the Islamic Saudi  Academy. After a thorough analysis, the Commission concluded  that the textbooks contained very troubling passages that did  not conform to international human rights standards, including  vilification of those who adhere to Christianity, Judaism,  Baha'i'ism, Ahmadism, and Shia Islam and others. I have  submitted for the record some of those statements.  And in 2009 I sent a letter, again, to Secretary of State  Clinton, urging the State Department monitor and report on the  textbooks published by the Saudi Government. In that letter I  acknowledged, ``To date, we have had only vague assurances on  the part of the State Department and the school that the  curriculum has been reformed. But these assurances are  insufficient, particularly when they are utterly at odds with  USCIRF's findings, and may be indicative of wider problems,  namely, the status of Saudi commitments made in 2006 to conduct  a comprehensive revision of textbooks and educational curricula  to weed out . . .''  While it is impossible to say that Mr. Abu Ali was directly  radicalized by the textbooks used at the Islamic Saudi Academy,  the use of the books that promote religious discrimination and  the justification of violence toward non-believers cannot be  tolerated, certainly not in Fairfax County, not in Virginia,  not in America, but quite frankly, anywhere around the world.  Consider that if this is the academy's curriculum in the  United States, just imagine how prolific the problem has been  across Saudi-affiliated academies, funded programs in other  countries around the world, especially in some countries in the  Middle East.  While the Ahmed Omar Abu Ali case is now almost a decade  old, Saudi Arabia has continued to promote and export radical  Wahhabism. In the wake of the Orlando shooting just last year,  Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton stated, ``It is  long past the time for the Saudis, the Qataris and the Kuwaitis  and others to stop their citizens from funding extremist  organizations. And they should stop,'' she said, ``supporting  radical schools and mosques around the world that have set too  many young people on the path toward extremism.''  And, unfortunately, by funding top American university  research centers, the Saudi Government has been able to  minimize voices of those in academia who you would have thought  otherwise would have had the best means for researching the  effects of radical Wahhabism.  While there are many concerns regarding the influence of  Saudi Arabia, more specifically radical Wahhabism, on countries  around the world, it would be remiss not to acknowledge that  very recently some small improvements have been made to the  educational material. In the latest report by USCIRF they said,  ``In February 2017 Saudi officials stated that the final stage  of revisions to high school texts was underway. During its  visit, USCIRF obtained some textbooks currently in use and  found some intolerant content remained in high school texts,  though at a reduced level.''  They go on to explain while there has been progress in  terms, there is still concern that some of the teachers may be  promoting a more radicalized version of Islam.  Some recommendations: One, the USCIRF has some very good  recommendations. Undertake and make public and annual  assessment.  I believe you have to put this in the legislation. If you  just let the State Department or the American Embassy in Saudi  Arabia, they will always find a reason not to do it. So I think  it needs to be mandated that the relevant Ministry of Education  textbooks determine the passages that teach religious  intolerance have been removed.  Secondly, press the Saudi Government to denounce publicly  the continued use around the world of older versions of Saudi  textbooks and other materials that promote hatred and  intolerance. And make every attempt to retrieve and buy back  previously distributed textbooks that contain intolerance.  You know, even in America's schools sometimes you're in a  class there will be a textbook that is 10, 15 years old. These  are still in schools around, around the world.  And keep in mind, lastly, the Saudis funded almost all of  the madrasas that were up on the Afghan-Pakistan border that  helped lead to what took place in the Taliban. Mullah Omar, the  head of the Taliban, was a graduate of a Saudi-funded academy.  The issue needs more work.  And I want to thank the subcommittee and the members  because I kind of thought for a while this issue was kind of  forgotten about. Mandate it and put it in. If you take the  pressure off the Saudis they will slip back in and this will  come in. You keep the pressure on and you can make a tremendous  difference.  I thank you for the hearing.  [The prepared statement of Mr. Wolf follows:]  [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    ----------    Mr. Poe. Thank you, Congressman Wolf.  Dr. Johnston.   STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS JOHNSTON, PH.D., PRESIDENT EMERITUS,   INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR RELIGION AND DIPLOMACY   Mr. Johnston. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you  for the honor of presenting to your committee some of the work  our center has been doing to try to help facilitate educational  reform in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We have a written  testimony that covers that comprehensively. I will just touch  on some of the highlights.  Before I do, though, I would like to just take 1 second to  honor the other witnesses here. Each is a champion of human  rights and religious freedom in their own right, and it is an  honor to be with them.  Our task, which I consider complementary to their own, has  been to take action to address the problem. And in 2011, we  received a grant from the State Department to develop  recommendations that would help facilitate reform efforts that  were already underway in the Kingdom. Toward this end, we  assessed all the textbooks for discriminatory content. And we  also tried to determine global dispersion of those textbooks.  It was a--from the start our approach was one of seeking to  be balanced, giving them credit for whatever progress had been  made, not only in that but in their deradicalization program,  but to be very unsparing in our detail of what yet remained to  be done. And there we completed a report, very comprehensive,  included 99 textbooks. I could go into great length on that,  but just suffice it to say that this report is just replete  with examples of the kinds of problems that have been cited  here with the other witnesses.  There is, at that point in time, this is 2011, sprinkled  throughout you would find direct license given for violent  behavior toward others who do not subscribe to that similar  brand of Islam. You would also find direct license for such  things as desecrating the tombs of the Sufi saints in Timbuktu,  which the extremists did before the French kicked them out. So,  lots of problems.  There were not only problems in the textbooks as a whole,  but even in the six grades that had already been thoroughly  revised we did find problems.  So, one of the things I would just point out, though, in  terms of looking at these things, I think it is important to  try to avoid using a western lens as we do so. By that I mean  what we try to do is hold their feet to the fire by comparing  what is in those textbooks to what is in the Holy Quran with  respect to that same subject area, what is in the Cairo  Declaration of Human Rights in Islam with respect to that. In  all cases, the Saudi textbooks were much more conservative than  the sources I just mentioned.  So, that is, that is a very important piece is just  understanding exactly where, how much freedom the Government of  Saudi Arabia has to really maneuver. There are so many wild  cards in the mix. There are charities through which textbooks  are distributed. There are maverick members of the royal  family. There are deep-pocketed Saudis who are not members of  the royal family. Lots of people with lots of agendas.  And one of the things that is also a bit of a constraint is  the fact that the original pact between the monarchy and the  Salafi Ulema called for education belongs to the religious  establishment. So one of the things that the Saudis were having  to do is to finesse that aspect, that obligation. They also  need to worry about the credibility that they maintain within  Islam itself as custodian of the two holiest sites. So this is,  this is not to forgive any of the textbook content, this is to  just explain why sometimes it may take a little bit longer than  we would like.  We established a comprehensive baseline for future  analysis. And we felt that the progress that the Saudis were  making was credible enough that we should probably keep the  report private, not release it to the public. Our concern was  that western critics seizing upon the offensive passages that  still remain might just shut down the whole process as a  defensive backlash sets in and the conservatives move in. We  have seen this time and again in different situations in the  Islamic world.  So, we spent the next 3 years implementing some of the  recommendations that we had come forward with.  Now, just to bring it right up to the present, we are in  another month we are going to be starting a new effort to look  at the textbooks of the high school grades which had not been  revised the last time we looked at them. We are also going to  take an in-depth look at three countries on how the Saudi  educational materials are affecting the religious and social.  What is that impact?  And I will say this, right now the Saudis claim to have  just completed that process, reform process that started way  back in 2007. And they realize, however, that they still have  problems. Many of those have been mentioned here right now. And  what they are planning to do is tackle it from two aspects.  One, is by 2020 to have developed a set of curriculum  standards. They have never had curriculum standards before. And  this is part of their national plan on educational reform which  was articulated in 2014, $22 billion behind it. It is very  serious money. That money has stayed protected even during  their budget shortfalls. And by these curriculum standards they  will then revise wholesale the content in all of the textbooks.  In the meantime, on a more urgent basis, they are going to  be looking at the current revised textbooks and within-- starting within 3 months they will start making changes on a  priority basis. And they will have these completed, according  to them, by the next school year, 2018 to 2019. And there is so  much going on right now. They are going to--in 3 years they  will have converted from textbooks to tablet computers. So  there is a lot of change underway.  I believe that the commitment is real. And they certainly  do understand the problem.  Thank you.  [The prepared statement of Mr. Johnston follows:]  [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    ----------    Mr. Poe. Thank you, Dr. Johnston. The Chair recognizes  himself for some questions.  I want to be clear that when we are dealing with Saudi  Arabia it is not all or nothing. Like I said earlier, they are  the arsonists but they are also the firefighters when it comes  to terrorism. That is what makes this very troubling, this  whole issue.  And, Ms. Shea, let me start with you. If I understand  correctly, Saudi Arabia agreed in 2006 that they would fix this  problem and they would have it all fixed by 2008. Is that  correct?  Ms. Shea. Yes, Mr. Chairman. They----  Mr. Poe. Okay. Reclaiming my time because I only have a few  minutes.  So here it is now 9 years later and it is still not fixed,  maybe some progress, but it is the issue that they promised in  2006 to fix the textbooks has not come about. Is that right?  Ms. Shea. Yes, that is correct.  Mr. Poe. So that is nine grades. That is almost a  generation of students that they furnished the textbooks to  that are still receiving this, in my opinion, violation of  human rights.  Saudi Arabian schools teach religion and it is mandatory  that all students go to these religious classes. Is that  correct?  Ms. Shea. Yes.  Mr. Poe. And that is where these textbooks are used?  Ms. Shea. Yes.  Mr. Poe. And they are not only used in Saudi Arabia but  they are used in other places in the world, including in the  United States, as Congressman Wolf has stated; is that right?  Ms. Shea. They have about 20 schools that they directly  run. And then they are spread--for example, Dr. Johnston's  report said that there were 150 schools that Saudi Arabia has  established in Burkina Faso alone. So that gives you some, you  know, some idea of the scale. It is all over the world, all  continents and where there are people, where there are Muslim  communities. And they are--not every one is receiving Saudi  textbooks, but many, many are.  Mr. Poe. And some say that the radicalization in Kosovo and  Indonesia are a result of these textbooks being in these  schools. Are you aware of that?  Ms. Shea. Yes, I am. I hear it all the time.  Mr. Poe. Congressman Wolf.  Mr. Wolf. Yes.  Mr. Poe. Dr. Johnston, I know the State Department  contracted with your group to study this issue, gave a grant,  American taxpayer money, a grant for you all to study the  issue. You studied it. You have got a report there in your  hand. But the State Department still to this day refuses to  release to the public that report. Is that correct?  Mr. Johnston. No, that is not true, sir.  Mr. Poe. So they have, they have released the report?  Mr. Johnston. They have. But not, not on their own doing.  Mr. Poe. It has been released because somebody leaked the  report.  Mr. Johnston. No. It was because the New York Times used  the Freedom of Information Act to get a copy of the report.  Mr. Poe. So it has been. The public does have access to  your entire report?  Mr. Johnston. Absolutely.  Mr. Poe. All right. Thank you. I did not know that.  So, Congressman Wolf, let me ask you. You mentioned a few  things that must be done. This has been going on for a good  number of years. And where we are today, I think the United  States--this is my opinion--doesn't want to endanger the  sensitivities of our relationship with our Saudi allies. What  would--how would you characterize this relationship and the  demanding that we--that they change their textbooks?  Mr. Wolf. Well, it goes up and down. And during the area of  oil crisis nobody wanted to offend the Saudis. America is fast  becoming basically energy independent.  I think what you are doing with the hearing today by  bringing the attention.  Two, there ought to be the new U.S. Ambassador for  Religious Freedom, the person whose name I have heard is a very  outstanding person who will be very good on this issue, the  subcommittee should meet with that person.  Thirdly, you ought to have questions going over to the  Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. When they send the name up of  the new Ambassador there will be very tough questions from both  sides of the aisle--this is not a political issue, if you  will--aggressively putting him on record or her on record,  whoever it is, that they will speak out.  Lastly, when he or she is confirmed this subcommittee  ought, ought to meet with them.  And I think the more you pressure and do it publicly, in a  very respectful way, you have to be careful, though, because  the Saudis put a lot of money in different universities. They  also hire prominent law firms in town. I couldn't believe, 3  weeks ago a prominent law firm was hired to represent Bashir,  an indicted war criminal, indicted for genocide, responsible  for the death of 200,000 to 300,000 people in Darfur, bombing  people in the Nuba Mountains, and yet a law firm, prominent law  firm working for him. So you have to be careful that there  isn't pressure.  But what you have done today following up with it, I don't  think the State Department will aggressively do it unless the  Congress pushes them.  Mr. Poe. Last question. Dr. Weinberg, you mentioned that 17  minutes into this hearing, that was a public notice that we  were having this hearing, the Saudi Arabians did something.  What did they do?  Mr. Weinberg. They, they announced on social media that a  new round of curriculum revisions had been completed which,  again, needs to be not a justification for letting scrutiny off  but a justification for added scrutiny to see if they have  actually delivered on what they pledged.  If I could just add my voice to what the Honorable Mr. Wolf  said about envoys. In addition to encouraging the  administration to nominate a qualified individual for the  congressionally-mandated post of Ambassador-at-Large for  International Religious Freedom, there are four other important  positions that are laying vacant on this issue right now.  There is currently no nominee, at least as of last I  checked 2 days ago, for a U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. It  should be somebody with real experience in the relationship and  not just business experience.  Additionally, there is no nominee for the Special  Representative of the State Department to Muslim Communities  Abroad, a crucial vacancy.  Additionally, there is still no nominee, no nominee for the  Anti-Semitism Envoy at the State Department. And the Secretary  of State even suggested that such a nominee might be  counterproductive for addressing anti-Semitism by taking it out  of the priorities of the State Department, which I think is a  deeply counterproductive perspective.  And then, lastly, there is the position of Ambassador for-- or Special Envoy for Religious Freedom of Minorities in the  Broader Middle East, a position that is mandated by Congress.  There is somebody serving in this capacity but not with the  level of seniority that Congress has mandated.  So those are all areas where you all can have an important  voice.  Mr. Poe. Four positions, four witnesses, I think maybe we  can solve that problem right here.  I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts, the ranking  member Mr. Keating.  Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Dr. Johnston, you mentioned that the Center is moving  forward and they are looking at three countries to see what the  effect, do an in-depth examination of the religious and social  impact of Saudi educational materials in those countries. Can  you tell us and expand on what countries were chosen and what  reason were those countries included in this study?  Mr. Johnston. They have not been chosen. We are currently  examining the feasibility of securing a memorandum of  understanding with selected governments that would pass this  test. These are going to be three countries of strategic  consequence. They will be drawn from Southeast Asia, the Middle  East, and Europe.  Mr. Keating. Could you share any timetable that you might  have?  Mr. Johnston. I would say that we would, we would have this  firmly underway within 2 months.  I would say, too, and I am sorry that time didn't permit  this earlier, but in response to our study on the global  impact, the Saudis actually put out a request to the Cultural  Attaches of every one of their Embassies around the world  encouraging them to, directing them to retrieve any old  textbooks that might be in use within their respective  geographic areas and to replace them with new.  The problem with that, of course, is the new still have  problems. But this is to just show you that they are not deaf  to the issue of this stuff going worldwide. And one of the  things we are trying to do is just to impart a sense of  ownership on all of that. And I think they are stepping up to  the plate.  Mr. Keating. Well, 9 years, they might be not be deaf but  they are slow of hearing I would say in a sense.  Mr. Johnston. It is glacial.  Mr. Keating. Certainly.  And one of the concerns, too, when we are looking at this  overall problem and the expansion of these materials, I think a  lot rests on the control that the home country has on its  education curriculum. I think Ms. Shea mentioned Burkina Faso  and Mali.  And how much are countries like that reliant on these Saudi  materials? Financially, what is the control? And this should  seem to me an opportunity for the United States to try and deal  with this directly. What opportunities could we have in those  countries if they are reliant on money and resources for  curriculum from Saudi Arabia, which we are learning today still  contains material that is not, not appropriate, to say the  least?  So, tell us about what your views are of the impact of  those home-controlled countries on the curriculum?  Ms. Shea. Yes, it is very determinant. I even spoke to an  imam from a mosque in the United States about--who had Saudi  textbooks in his library that he made available in the school.  And he has since removed it he said. But he, he said that the  reason why is that he didn't--he was working with an immigrant  community that was impoverished, and that they do not have a  school, they do not have textbooks, they do not have religious  textbooks. So they turn to the country in the world with the  deep pockets for such things. So they----  Mr. Keating. Could I interrupt to say that given the U.S.  interest here, isn't that a priority for our country perhaps?  Is there an opportunity? Or would they not be receptive to the  United States?  Ms. Shea. Well, it is going to be very tricky. The United  States cannot be funding religious things like that.  Mr. Keating. How about through NGOs or funding through NGOs  or anything like this?  Ms. Shea. Well, I think the solution, again, is to force  the--or press the Saudis to clean up their textbooks because  they are going to be online. And----  Mr. Keating. Well, if they are, if the Saudis are so  sincere about this, what are they doing currently to the  current generation and the prior generations that have been so  indoctrinated in this material? Have they done anything in a  remedial nature to deal with this whatsoever?  Mr. Johnston. Well, one of the things they did in their  deradicalization program is that they fired 3,000 imams. They  retrained 20,000 others out of a total pool of 75,000 imams. So  that is, that is taking care of it within their own borders.  Beyond that, the question that you asked where they have  paid for the mosques and all the rest of it, you find in most  countries they have significant control over what is taking  place in the schools.  Again, I would just point out there is an important caveat  here. That may not be the Government of Saudi Arabia very  easily it seems. You know, peel back the onion, it is very  difficult to follow.  Mr. Keating. If I could----  Mr. Johnston. But, but a more----  Mr. Keating [continuing]. Just because my time is about to  expire, if I could just--then you can have your chance with the  committee to address that, a little bit of an expansion here.  Congressman Wolf mentioned some of the things directly he  thought. He gave specifics about what the U.S. could do. Just  in a very short summary, if any of you have specific, specific  ideas I would like to hear them.  Mr. Weinberg. So on the topic of exportation that we were  just discussing, one thing that has always plagued this issue,  and this was a challenge for that New York Times investigation  that the chairman was discussing, I spoke with some of the  reporters who were involved in that and related efforts at the  Times, and one of the challenges when it comes to studying this  exportation issue is there is often only anecdotal data or it  is, you know, very, very vague and impressionistic.  So, one of the things that the U.S. Government can do to  really play an important role here is to use all the assets of  the U.S. Government on this, and in particular, the  intelligence community. The easiest thing, or the most  important thing that can be done in terms of informing this  debate would simply be a directive from Congress to the  intelligence community to monitor the exportation of incitement  from Saudi Arabia, including but not limited to textbooks, and  to direct them to report on this.  Additionally, Congress can call for rebooting the U.S.- Saudi strategic dialogue with a track to include issues related  to incitement. And that rebooting, in a general sense, is  something that the new crown prince of Saudi Arabia is reported  to support.  And then, additionally, Congress can publicly and privately  raise this issue, as well as urging the President to do so, and  to issue a formal directive to U.S. agencies and cabinet  members to do so as well.  Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Weinberg. In respect to my  other committee members, if you can do that in writing----  Mr. Johnston. Do you want any more ideas?  Mr. Keating [continuing]. I think that would be helpful.  We might, but I have to be respectful of the other  committee members, unless we have a second round. But anything  like that I think the committee would appreciate in writing.  And, also, you know the committee is aware perhaps that  there is classified material along the lines that Dr. Weinberg  suggested that they may want to review, something that I think  the committee might be interested in doing.  And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.  Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.  Perry.  Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the panel here.  Mr. Weinberg, you mentioned a report in your testimony, or  maybe in questions, I can't remember, but what is the report  going to do? What is it going to do to Saudi Arabia and what is  it--said report, so to speak, what would it do to the United  States?  Mr. Weinberg. So, one of the challenges of this issue to  date is something that Ms. Shea addresses in her written  testimony, which is the tendency of the State Department,  because its priority is maintaining constructive relations with  Saudi Arabia and advancing a range of other issues in the  bilateral relationship such that they usually don't want to  rock the boat, that a long-term strategic priority for the  United States like textbooks doesn't get raised in the  immediate term when it needs to get raised, and it gets kicked  down the road indefinitely.  So as a result, State Department language on this issue  every year in their International Religious Freedom Report, in  their Human Rights Report, as well as in their country reports  on terrorism such as the one that came out today, basically  have a throw-away line or two about some incitement still  remaining, without providing any specific examples typically,  or at least without providing direct quotations. And so, and  well----  Mr. Perry. Is this not like widely known? Like, doesn't the  whole world, like, we all know this; right? Everybody knows,  everybody in the room knows this. With all due respect, I just,  look, the report might be nice but I don't, I don't see it  moving the ball quite honestly.  Mr. Weinberg. Yes.  Mr. Perry. I mean, maybe in the panoply of everything you  are going to do that, you have to add that.  Mr. Weinberg. If I could play devil's advocate for a  moment. So, part of the challenge with this issue has been the  absence of current data when people actually have their  conversations with Saudi officials.  So, for example, the important study that Mr. Johnston's  institute did, its results were not raised with Saudi officials  by them or by the U.S. Government to the best of our  knowledge----  Mr. Perry. But that is the, that is----  Mr. Weinberg [continuing]. Until the books were already  obsolete.  Mr. Perry. That is an issue of will, not of information. I  mean, I have got textbook experts right in front--excerpts  right in front of me here, so.  Mr. Weinberg. But the reason those excerpts were done,  until May most of those excerpts were not actually in the  public sphere because nobody had gotten access to the books and  sat down and read them and transcribed them.  Mr. Perry. You are telling me that we legitimately----  Mr. Weinberg. So for several years we didn't know.  Mr. Perry. And I am not trying to be bellicose or  difficult----  Mr. Weinberg. Yeah.  Mr. Perry [continuing]. But you are telling me we had no  physical evidence like this----  Mr. Weinberg. Right.  Mr. Perry [continuing]. Until May 2017?  Mr. Weinberg. For this academic year, yes.  Mr. Perry. Oh, for this academic year. But we have for  every other academic year back to 1970, 1980 or something.  Mr. Weinberg. But just, just like that tweet from the Saudi  Embassy that we were discussing, the Saudi Government every  year claims that this has, this has been seriously worked over  and so the stuff that people are concerned about is old news.  And so it is important for the United States Government----  Mr. Perry. Well, of course there is propaganda. I mean, you  can listen to Russia T.V. and Al Jazeera as well if you want to  believe all that stuff. But I mean, I hope that Americans are a  little brighter than that.  Let me ask anybody this: Regarding incitement, because I  just don't feel like we ever go far enough, and I am not sure  even the suggestions I have heard go far enough to suit me-- that is just me--but does anybody know whether incitement, you  know, when you talk about the penalty for the adulterer who has  previously consummated a marriage is stoning to death, that is  in the book; or apostasy, you know, the penalty for apostasy is  killing, that is, you know, that is in the textbook; you know,  I don't know if this is incitement in the classic example or  case. And I don't know if it meets the Brandenburg test.  Does anybody know if it does? Have we ever tried to? I  mean, nobody wants to get into the suppression of free speech,  but at some point free speech crosses over the line into  incitement. Now, I guess the test is intended, likely, and  imminent, and which the courts at some point decided what  imminent was. Does anybody know whether that has ever been  challenged? Have we ever taken a shot at it? Does the  government have an interest?  Okay. Yes, ma'am.  Ms. Shea. Well, I think, I think we have done that in the  case of Americans who have posted such death threats against,  like for example, the South Park cartoonist who did an  irreverent cartoon of----  Mr. Perry. But I am talking about the textbooks. Is this,  is this,----  Ms. Shea. But no, I mean I don't see how that----  Mr. Perry [continuing]. Is this considered incitement?  Ms. Shea. I don't see how that could be, I don't see how  there is--there is diplomatic immunity--I don't see how the  Saudi textbook.  Mr. Perry. The textbook has diplomatic immunity?  Ms. Shea. Well, they are published by the Government of  Saudi Arabia who would be held responsible. The Ministry of  Education of Saudi Arabia is the, the printer. And the  Government of Saudi Arabia is the sponsor.  Mr. Perry. So if the Government of Saudi Arabia publishes  information that says that every, every citizen that has an  affiliation with Saudi Arabia living in the United States  should kill the next American they see, there is nothing we can  do about that? Like we can't, we can't have that removed from  the shelf because it is the Government of Saudi Arabia?  Ms. Shea. Well, that is the--I mean, we have pressed people  who actually carried out the crime. But it, you know----  Mr. Perry. But incitement, there have been prosecutions for  incitement in advance of the crime based on incitement; right?  The question is has, to anybody's knowledge has anybody in the  United States on behalf of the United States pursued that  avenue regarding the textbooks and the passages therein as  incitement?  Ms. Shea. Some of the 9/11 victims' families may have been  suing Saudi Arabia for reparations. But, but I don't know what  the theory of their case was, whether it was the incitement.  Mr. Perry. It seems like maybe either the answer is no or  unknown. So maybe that is a place we can go into further.  Mr. Chairman, I yield back.  Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania.  The Chair will have one more round of 2 minutes per member.  I will yield my time initially to the ranking member Mr.  Keating from Massachusetts for his questions.  Mr. Keating. Mr. Weinberg, you said one of the things that  we can all do is speak up more and be consistent in doing it at  every level. Taking into consideration what Congressman Wolf  said, you know, there are generations of leaders before this,  both sides of the aisle, that haven't been aggressive enough,  as he testified.  However, President Trump was just in Saudi Arabia.  President Trump was talking about extremism and the need to  band together to do it. Yet there is no report that he brought  this issue up in the course of that.  What is the danger in not bringing this up, particularly at  that level, particularly under that thing?  Mr. Weinberg. Yes. So this is, this is, this is the  challenge is that the President almost never raises the issue.  This was the case with President George W. Bush, this was the  case with President Obama. This was the--appears to be the case  with President Trump. Which is part of why the strategic  dialogue was inaugurated between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia  under the Bush administration so that senior officials could  still raise priority concerns when it didn't rise to a level of  the Commander-in-Chief as their number one, or two, or three  priority but still needed to be addressed because of U.S.  interests.  But that having been said, that is not an excuse for the  President not to address it. It is not an excuse for the  President not to direct cabinet members to do so as well.  President Trump, when he participated in the inauguration  of a global center for combating extremist ideology in Saudi,  while he was in Saudi Arabia--which by the way was in the works  for 2 years and then they repackaged it to be a deliverable  during this summit--he predicted it would make history.  Reflecting on his visit to the Kingdom several weeks later,  he urged all nations to stop teaching people to kill other  people, stop filling their minds with hate and intolerance. And  he said he would not name other countries besides Qatar.  Now, I actually have an article draft forthcoming which  explains why Qatar's record on counterterrorism issues is  actually worse than all of its other neighbors in the Gulf  monarchies. But that having been said, the books need to be  addressed directly, with knowledge, on a regular basis with  current information about the current school year, or else it  is not going to have any impact with the Saudi Government.  Otherwise, the Saudi Government is going to keep doing what it  is doing, which is reprinting these books year after year with  incitement, and indoctrinating, you know, at least several more  years of students with this problematic information.  Mr. Johnston. May I correct the record on something? This  report was in fact--I briefed the Saudis in Riyadh on this  report. It was sent over through diplomatic channels as well.  And out of that came one ray of hope.  We worked for several years on one of the recommendations  which was to bring Saudi educators together with American  educators to deal with the problem of bias and intolerance in  national education systems. Out of this came a series of  recommendations to their government, and our own, but to their  government which I delivered to their Minister of Education.  One of the things I feel is so important, and it hasn't  been mentioned here, but far more important than these  textbooks, far more important is the teacher training. And we  have opportunities now to be able to go over there and in the  context of this national plan for educational reform, which was  crafted mostly by McKinsey & Company, it is a dynamite plan,  and if they fully implement it it will actually leapfrog some  of our own habits. But I think there the door is open that we  could go and help them implement this and particularly get at  the teacher training, which is, as I say, far more important.  Mr. Keating. I yield back.  Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.  Perry.  Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.  Mr. Johnston, Dr. Johnston, I understand one of the  problems for the United States is how the actions, the  statements versus actions coming from Saudi Arabia are  determined. And I indeed asked the Secretary about the metrics  to determine efficacy of the Saudi's actions and how we are  measuring their progress.  I will tell you now--well, the man's been on the job for 4  or 5 months, right, so we have to give him some leeway--but I  didn't get a lot of confidence that anything meaningful was  there. And I actually wonder, some of the officials who may be  determining whether what the efficacy is, literally that might  be, I hate to say it, but so to speak working for the other  side.  So, in your work with the, the ICRD how would you  characterize the metrics we use and who is determining? Is it,  it is appropriate or is that problematic that--that needs to be  addressed? And where is that addressed?  Mr. Johnston. No, I, I think one of the metrics is the  baseline that we established here back in 2011. To be sure, we  haven't looked at those books in 5 years. But the U.S.  Commission on International Religious Freedom did several years  ago. We provided them the baseline.  They determined that further reform was taking place. And  in this year's annual report they even talk about a visit there  in February of this year where they determined that more reform  was taking place. So this is a metric.  We are going to be looking very hard at it starting in  another month on the high school grades. That is where most of  the onerous content exists.  And one of the other things in terms about why this is so  slow is they took a full year to field test their revisions to  the 10th grade, which was, as far as we were concerned, was the  one grade where it was the worst. And they did those revisions.  I don't know what has come of that. We will find out. But they  did take a full year to test it.  And the other thing we have to remember is that a lot of  this is getting in on religious grounds. And some of that is  pretty----  Mr. Perry. But I think they use that. And good for them, I  suppose.  Mr. Johnston. Sometimes yes. Yes.  Mr. Perry. But it is an Achilles heel for the United  States. And we can't allow that to be used against us,  especially for what many consider to be seditious activity.  And I also would question what progress means or what, you  know, reforms are taking place at what level. I mean, reform,  you know, they might change one word in that sentence and of  course they reformed the sentence, I guess in this classic,  very strict constructionist sense. But from the greater sense  and the spirit of it, it is not getting the job done and it is  not getting done quickly enough for us.  And what they do in their country, quite honestly and quite  frankly from my opinion, that is their business, but what they  do in our country is our business.  Mr. Johnston. Yes. No, your points are very valid.  One thing I would say is in addition to eliminating  negative content, one of the things we have found, and we just  took a quick glance, there is the addition of very positive  content that sort of works in the other direction.  I don't know to what extent they are constrained by this  needing to keep their religious establishment on board, because  that is where they get their, their authority from is from the  religious establishment. That is part of the package. So it is  a difficult walk that they are making. The people that I have  worked with I am 1,000 percent convinced are very sincere. And,  in fact, one of them----  Mr. Perry. With the chairman's indulgence, I agree, in  their country it is inexorably linked since they came to power,  the House of Saud. And I get all that and why the need to keep,  to do all the things they need to do. I don't agree with it but  I understand it.  However, in this country none of it is appropriate, none of  it is appropriate and we should take action.  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Mr. Poe. I thank the gentleman.  Congressman Wolf, I have a question for you first and then  I will let you make a comment because I know you want to keep,  you want to talk about the last question.  ISIS used Saudi Arabian textbooks up until 2015. That was 2  years ago. And now they use their own textbooks. Would you like  to comment on where ISIS gets--got their textbooks to begin  with?  Mr. Wolf. Well, you are right. In the New York Times piece  they say, ``In a huge embarrassment to the Saudi authorities,  the Islamic State adopted official Saudi textbooks for its  schools until the extremist group could publish its own  textbooks in 2015.''  Secondly, when I was in 2 years ago we went up into the  Nineveh Plains. We went into meetings with all the different  people. At every meeting I said, Tell me, who is helping the  Saudis--rather, who is helping ISIS? And every meeting, every  meeting two came up, some three, but two came up: The Saudis,  not always the Saudi Government but Saudi individuals, and he  sort of alluded to the renegade guy; secondly, Qatar. They were  aiding and abetting ISIS. And there was another country,  Turkey, who was for the longest period of time was allowing  people, they go to Istanbul, they call a telephone number, they  go south and they join.  They may have changed. But don't forget, 15 of the 19  hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was from Saudi  Arabia. The number of people from my area who were killed in  the attack on the Pentagon, the guys who did it, Saudi Arabia.  And so I think what this committee has done today with the  hearing, the textbooks are important, but all these issues, and  you push and you push and you push. And I urge you to meet with  the new ambassador, and I urge you to sit down with him or her,  whoever it is, and pressure them, and the new religious freedom  ambassador. I think you may have started something here.  And the real danger is you even recall last year--I read  the 28 pages--you remember last year the issue came up, the  Saudis hired law firms and PR firms in this town to do  everything. Fortunately the Congress, to its good credit,  passed it and was not influenced. But you know what is going  on, so by this hearing you can cover all the textbooks are  important but terrorism is important. All these things are  very, very important. And, hopefully, this can be the genesis  if you guys, men and women, continue to really make a  difference and stop what Saudi Arabia has been doing for a long  period of time.  Mr. Poe. Thank you. And the ranking member and I will  request a meeting with the Ambassador and we will go from  there. Maybe have a hearing in the future on Qatar, have all of  you back.  And I want to have one last question for all four of you.  Since we are talking about textbooks and schools, how would you  rank the--at this time--the goal of changing the textbooks so  that they don't preach hate, intolerance, and violence? And it  is real simple, it is not pass or fail, it is A, B, C, D, or F.  You understand the question, Ms. Shea? How would you rank  what Saudi Arabia is doing right now?  Ms. Shea. F.  Mr. Poe. All right. Dr. Weinberg?  Mr. Weinberg. F with credit for effort.  Mr. Poe. F with credit for effort. Okay.  Congressman Wolf?  Mr. Wolf. F plus instead of F.  Mr. Poe. Dr. Johnston?  Mr. Johnston. I would give it a D.  And one of the things I would point out is that as long as  we are, you know, buying 150 billion--selling $150 billion  worth of arms to the Saudis, they are not going to pay a whole  lot of attention to western criticism. When you couple that  reality with the line they are walking with the religious  establishment, I think that they are making as much progress as  one could hope for at this point in time.  They need to do a lot better, but there is, there is  sincere desire to do better on their part, the government's  part. I don't know about the religious.  Mr. Poe. And without belaboring the point, if we take Ms.  Shea's recommendation, we tie defense contracts to Saudi Arabia  with the repairing of their textbooks, that may get somebody's  attention. I don't know. We will see.  Anyway, I want to thank all of you for being here. I want  to thank all of the people in the audience for being here as  well.  And this subcommittee is adjourned.  [Whereupon, at 3:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]        A P P E N D I X   ----------  [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]   [all]