

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Before
House Members vote on H.Res. 867, regarding the U.N. Goldstone report
on the Gaza conflict, there are a few questions worth asking.
First,
why are we bringing this resolution to the floor without ever giving
former South African Constitutional Court Justice Richard Goldstone a
hearing to explain his findings? Have those who will vote on H.Res. 867
actually read the resolution? Have they read the Goldstone report? Are
they aware that Justice Goldstone has issued a paragraph-by-paragraph
response, available on my Web site at baird.house.gov, to H.Res. 867 pointing out that many of its assertions are factually inaccurate or deeply misleading?
Since
scarcely a dozen House Members have actually been to Gaza , what actual
firsthand knowledge do the rest of the Members of Congress possess on
which to base their judgment of the merits of H.Res. 867 or the
Goldstone report?
What
will it say about this Congress and our country if we so readily seek
to block "any further consideration" of a human rights investigation
produced by one of the most respected jurists in the world today, a man
who led the investigations of abuses in South Africa, the former
Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Kosovo, and worked to identify and prosecute
Nazi war criminals as a member of the Panel of the Commission of
Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina?
As
one of the first two American officials, along with Rep. Keith Ellison
(D-Minn.), to enter Gaza shortly after the conclusion of major bombing
from "Operation Cast Lead," then again several months later, I have
seen firsthand the devastating destruction of hospitals, schools,
homes, industries and infrastructure. Much of that devastation was
wrought using U.S. manufactured and paid for weaponry. I have also
spoken with health workers, average Gazans, nongovernmental
organization relief workers and many others.
In
addition, I have been to the Israeli town of Sderot , which has been
the target of repeated rocket attacks, and to a number of Palestinian
towns and Israeli settlements in the West Bank . Colleagues who have
not been to the region may wish to view some of the images and
interviews from these visits on my Web site.
With
the information from these personal visits and on-the-ground knowledge,
I read with care and interest the Goldstone report in its entirety, and
my firm conclusion is that, although the findings may be unpleasant and
troubling, they are, unfortunately, consistent with the facts and
evidence. In my judgment, far from meriting the obstruction called for
in H.Res. 867, the Goldstone report is without question worthy of
further investigation.
I
know this conclusion is not easily accepted, and I know it raises
serious charges against entities and individuals on both sides of this
conflict, Israel and Hamas. But if our own country is truly to stand
for human rights and the rule of law, and if facts matter, how can we
do other than insist that legitimate questions and evidence are
followed by further investigation and, if necessary and warranted,
appropriate consequences?
H.Res.
867 is very serious business. If, as Goldstone asserts and the evidence
I have seen supports, there were in fact gross violations of
international law and human rights on all sides, we cannot in good
conscience support H.Res. 867.
This
is about much more than just another imposed political litmus test that
we are all too often asked to perform. This is about whether we as
individuals and this Congress as an institution find it acceptable to
drop white phosphorous on civilian targets, to rocket civilian
communities, to destroy hospitals and schools, to use civilians as
human shields, and to deliberately destroy nonmilitary factories,
industries and basic water, electrical and sanitation infrastructure.
This is about whether it is acceptable to restrict the movement,
opportunities and hopes of more than a million people every single day.
At
the end of the day, this is also about our own domestic security. If we
are seen internationally as condoning violations of human rights and
international law, if our money and our weaponry play a leading role in
those violations, and if we reflexively obstruct the findings of
someone with the credentials, history and integrity of Justice
Goldstone, it can only diminish our international standing and our own
security.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Before
House Members vote on H.Res. 867, regarding the U.N. Goldstone report
on the Gaza conflict, there are a few questions worth asking.
First,
why are we bringing this resolution to the floor without ever giving
former South African Constitutional Court Justice Richard Goldstone a
hearing to explain his findings? Have those who will vote on H.Res. 867
actually read the resolution? Have they read the Goldstone report? Are
they aware that Justice Goldstone has issued a paragraph-by-paragraph
response, available on my Web site at baird.house.gov, to H.Res. 867 pointing out that many of its assertions are factually inaccurate or deeply misleading?
Since
scarcely a dozen House Members have actually been to Gaza , what actual
firsthand knowledge do the rest of the Members of Congress possess on
which to base their judgment of the merits of H.Res. 867 or the
Goldstone report?
What
will it say about this Congress and our country if we so readily seek
to block "any further consideration" of a human rights investigation
produced by one of the most respected jurists in the world today, a man
who led the investigations of abuses in South Africa, the former
Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Kosovo, and worked to identify and prosecute
Nazi war criminals as a member of the Panel of the Commission of
Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina?
As
one of the first two American officials, along with Rep. Keith Ellison
(D-Minn.), to enter Gaza shortly after the conclusion of major bombing
from "Operation Cast Lead," then again several months later, I have
seen firsthand the devastating destruction of hospitals, schools,
homes, industries and infrastructure. Much of that devastation was
wrought using U.S. manufactured and paid for weaponry. I have also
spoken with health workers, average Gazans, nongovernmental
organization relief workers and many others.
In
addition, I have been to the Israeli town of Sderot , which has been
the target of repeated rocket attacks, and to a number of Palestinian
towns and Israeli settlements in the West Bank . Colleagues who have
not been to the region may wish to view some of the images and
interviews from these visits on my Web site.
With
the information from these personal visits and on-the-ground knowledge,
I read with care and interest the Goldstone report in its entirety, and
my firm conclusion is that, although the findings may be unpleasant and
troubling, they are, unfortunately, consistent with the facts and
evidence. In my judgment, far from meriting the obstruction called for
in H.Res. 867, the Goldstone report is without question worthy of
further investigation.
I
know this conclusion is not easily accepted, and I know it raises
serious charges against entities and individuals on both sides of this
conflict, Israel and Hamas. But if our own country is truly to stand
for human rights and the rule of law, and if facts matter, how can we
do other than insist that legitimate questions and evidence are
followed by further investigation and, if necessary and warranted,
appropriate consequences?
H.Res.
867 is very serious business. If, as Goldstone asserts and the evidence
I have seen supports, there were in fact gross violations of
international law and human rights on all sides, we cannot in good
conscience support H.Res. 867.
This
is about much more than just another imposed political litmus test that
we are all too often asked to perform. This is about whether we as
individuals and this Congress as an institution find it acceptable to
drop white phosphorous on civilian targets, to rocket civilian
communities, to destroy hospitals and schools, to use civilians as
human shields, and to deliberately destroy nonmilitary factories,
industries and basic water, electrical and sanitation infrastructure.
This is about whether it is acceptable to restrict the movement,
opportunities and hopes of more than a million people every single day.
At
the end of the day, this is also about our own domestic security. If we
are seen internationally as condoning violations of human rights and
international law, if our money and our weaponry play a leading role in
those violations, and if we reflexively obstruct the findings of
someone with the credentials, history and integrity of Justice
Goldstone, it can only diminish our international standing and our own
security.
Before
House Members vote on H.Res. 867, regarding the U.N. Goldstone report
on the Gaza conflict, there are a few questions worth asking.
First,
why are we bringing this resolution to the floor without ever giving
former South African Constitutional Court Justice Richard Goldstone a
hearing to explain his findings? Have those who will vote on H.Res. 867
actually read the resolution? Have they read the Goldstone report? Are
they aware that Justice Goldstone has issued a paragraph-by-paragraph
response, available on my Web site at baird.house.gov, to H.Res. 867 pointing out that many of its assertions are factually inaccurate or deeply misleading?
Since
scarcely a dozen House Members have actually been to Gaza , what actual
firsthand knowledge do the rest of the Members of Congress possess on
which to base their judgment of the merits of H.Res. 867 or the
Goldstone report?
What
will it say about this Congress and our country if we so readily seek
to block "any further consideration" of a human rights investigation
produced by one of the most respected jurists in the world today, a man
who led the investigations of abuses in South Africa, the former
Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Kosovo, and worked to identify and prosecute
Nazi war criminals as a member of the Panel of the Commission of
Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina?
As
one of the first two American officials, along with Rep. Keith Ellison
(D-Minn.), to enter Gaza shortly after the conclusion of major bombing
from "Operation Cast Lead," then again several months later, I have
seen firsthand the devastating destruction of hospitals, schools,
homes, industries and infrastructure. Much of that devastation was
wrought using U.S. manufactured and paid for weaponry. I have also
spoken with health workers, average Gazans, nongovernmental
organization relief workers and many others.
In
addition, I have been to the Israeli town of Sderot , which has been
the target of repeated rocket attacks, and to a number of Palestinian
towns and Israeli settlements in the West Bank . Colleagues who have
not been to the region may wish to view some of the images and
interviews from these visits on my Web site.
With
the information from these personal visits and on-the-ground knowledge,
I read with care and interest the Goldstone report in its entirety, and
my firm conclusion is that, although the findings may be unpleasant and
troubling, they are, unfortunately, consistent with the facts and
evidence. In my judgment, far from meriting the obstruction called for
in H.Res. 867, the Goldstone report is without question worthy of
further investigation.
I
know this conclusion is not easily accepted, and I know it raises
serious charges against entities and individuals on both sides of this
conflict, Israel and Hamas. But if our own country is truly to stand
for human rights and the rule of law, and if facts matter, how can we
do other than insist that legitimate questions and evidence are
followed by further investigation and, if necessary and warranted,
appropriate consequences?
H.Res.
867 is very serious business. If, as Goldstone asserts and the evidence
I have seen supports, there were in fact gross violations of
international law and human rights on all sides, we cannot in good
conscience support H.Res. 867.
This
is about much more than just another imposed political litmus test that
we are all too often asked to perform. This is about whether we as
individuals and this Congress as an institution find it acceptable to
drop white phosphorous on civilian targets, to rocket civilian
communities, to destroy hospitals and schools, to use civilians as
human shields, and to deliberately destroy nonmilitary factories,
industries and basic water, electrical and sanitation infrastructure.
This is about whether it is acceptable to restrict the movement,
opportunities and hopes of more than a million people every single day.
At
the end of the day, this is also about our own domestic security. If we
are seen internationally as condoning violations of human rights and
international law, if our money and our weaponry play a leading role in
those violations, and if we reflexively obstruct the findings of
someone with the credentials, history and integrity of Justice
Goldstone, it can only diminish our international standing and our own
security.