[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 19]
[House]
[Pages 26556-26572]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  OPPOSING ANY ENDORSEMENT OR FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF THE 
        UNITED NATIONS FACT FINDING MISSION ON THE GAZA CONFLICT

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the 
resolution (H. Res. 867) calling on the President and the Secretary of 
State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration 
of the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza 
Conflict'' in multilateral fora, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 867

       Whereas, on January 12, 2009, the United Nations Human 
     Rights Council passed Resolution A/HRC/S-9/L.1, which 
     authorized a ``fact-finding mission'' regarding Israel's 
     conduct of Operation Cast Lead against violent militants in 
     the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008, and January 18, 
     2009;
       Whereas the resolution pre-judged the outcome of its 
     investigation, by one-sidedly mandating the ``fact-finding 
     mission'' to ``investigate all violations of international 
     human rights law and International Humanitarian Law by . . . 
     Israel, against the Palestinian people . . . particularly in 
     the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression'';
       Whereas the mandate of the ``fact-finding mission'' makes 
     no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which 
     numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight 
     years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza 
     against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated 
     Israel's defensive measures;
       Whereas the ``fact-finding mission'' included a member who, 
     before joining the mission, had already declared Israel 
     guilty of committing atrocities in Operation Cast Lead by 
     signing a public letter on January 11, 2009, published in the 
     Sunday Times, that called Israel's actions ``war crimes'';
       Whereas the mission's flawed and biased mandate gave 
     serious concern to many United Nations Human Rights Council 
     Member States which refused to support it, including Bosnia 
     and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, 
     Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, 
     Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom of 
     Great Britain and Northern Ireland;
       Whereas the mission's flawed and biased mandate troubled 
     many distinguished individuals who refused invitations to 
     head the mission;
       Whereas Justice Richard Goldstone, who chaired the ``United 
     Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict'', told the 
     then-President of the UNHRC, Nigerian Ambassador Martin 
     Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi, that he intended to broaden the mandate 
     of the Mission to include ``all violations of international 
     human rights law and international humanitarian law that 
     might have been committed at any time in the context of the 
     military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the 
     period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether 
     before, during or after'', a phrase that, according to 
     Justice Goldstone, was intended to allow him to investigate 
     Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians;
       Whereas Ambassador Uhomoibhi issued a statement on April 3, 
     2009, that endorsed part of Justice Goldstone's proposed 
     broadened mandate but deleted the phrase ``before, during, 
     and after'', and added inflammatory anti-Israeli language;
       Whereas a so-called broadened mandate was never officially 
     endorsed by a plenary meeting of the UNHRC, neither in the 
     form proposed by Justice Goldstone nor in the form proposed 
     by Ambassador Uhomoibhi;
       Whereas, on September 15, 2009, the ``United Nations Fact 
     Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict'' released its report;
       Whereas the report repeatedly made sweeping and 
     unsubstantiated determinations that the Israeli military had 
     deliberately attacked civilians during Operation Cast Lead;
       Whereas the authors of the report admit that ``we did not 
     deal with the issues . . . regarding the problems of 
     conducting military operations in civilian areas and second-
     guessing decisions made by soldiers and their commanding 
     officers `in the fog of war.''';
       Whereas in the October 16th edition of the Jewish Daily 
     Forward, Richard Goldstone, the head of the ``United Nations 
     Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict'', is quoted as 
     saying, with respect to the mission's evidence-collection 
     methods, ``If this was a court of law, there would have been 
     nothing proven.'';
       Whereas the report, in effect, denied the State of Israel 
     the right to self-defense, and never noted the fact that 
     Israel had the right to defend its citizens from the repeated 
     violent attacks committed against civilian targets in 
     southern Israel by Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist 
     Organizations operating from Gaza;
       Whereas the report largely ignored the culpability of the 
     Government of Iran and the Government of Syria, both of whom 
     sponsor Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations;
       Whereas the report usually considered public statements 
     made by Israeli officials not to be credible, while 
     frequently giving uncritical credence to statements taken 
     from what it called the ``Gaza authorities'', i.e. the Gaza 
     leadership of Hamas;
       Whereas, notwithstanding a great body of evidence that 
     Hamas and other violent Islamist groups committed war crimes 
     by using civilians and civilian institutions, such as 
     mosques, schools, and hospitals, as

[[Page 26557]]

     shields, the report repeatedly downplayed or cast doubt upon 
     that claim;
       Whereas in one notable instance, the report stated that it 
     did not consider the admission of a Hamas official that Hamas 
     often ``created a human shield of women, children, the 
     elderly and the mujahideen, against [the Israeli military]'' 
     specifically to ``constitute evidence that Hamas forced 
     Palestinian civilians to shield military objectives against 
     attack.'';
       Whereas Hamas was able to significantly shape the findings 
     of the investigation mission's report by selecting and 
     prescreening some of the witnesses and intimidating others, 
     as the report acknowledges when it notes that ``those 
     interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the 
     presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian 
     armed groups . . . from a fear of reprisals'';
       Whereas even though Israel is a vibrant democracy with a 
     vigorous and free press, the report of the ``fact-finding 
     mission'' erroneously asserts that ``actions of the Israeli 
     government . . . have contributed significantly to a 
     political climate in which dissent with the government and 
     its actions . . . is not tolerated'';
       Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 
     Human Rights Council endorse its recommendations, implement 
     them, review their implementation, and refer the report to 
     the United Nations Security Council, the Prosecutor of the 
     International Criminal Court, and the United Nations General 
     Assembly for further action;
       Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 
     Security Council--
       (1) require the Government of Israel to launch further 
     investigations of its conduct during Operation Cast Lead and 
     report back to the Security Council within six months;
       (2) simultaneously appoint an ``independent committee of 
     experts'' to monitor and report on any domestic legal or 
     other proceedings undertaken by the Government of Israel 
     within that six-month period; and
       (3) refer the case to the Prosecutor of the International 
     Criminal Court after that six-month period;
       Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 
     General Assembly consider further action on the report and 
     establish an escrow fund, to be funded entirely by the State 
     of Israel, to ``pay adequate compensation to Palestinians who 
     have suffered loss and damage'' during Operation Cast Lead;
       Whereas the report ignored the issue of compensation to 
     Israelis who have been killed or wounded, or suffered other 
     loss and damage, as a result of years of past and continuing 
     rocket and mortar attacks by Hamas and other violent militant 
     groups in Gaza against civilian targets in southern Israel;
       Whereas the report recommended ``that States Parties to the 
     Geneva Conventions of 1949 start criminal investigations [of 
     Operation Cast Lead] in national courts, using universal 
     jurisdiction'' and that ``following investigation, alleged 
     perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted'';
       Whereas the concept of ``universal jurisdiction'' has 
     frequently been used in attempts to detain, charge, and 
     prosecute Israeli and United States officials and former 
     officials in connection with unfounded allegations of war 
     crimes and has often unfairly impeded the travel of those 
     individuals;
       Whereas the State of Israel, like many other free 
     democracies, has an independent judicial system with a robust 
     investigatory capacity and has already launched numerous 
     investigations, many of which remain ongoing, of Operation 
     Cast Lead and individual incidents therein;
       Whereas Libya and others have indicated that they intend to 
     further pursue consideration of the report and implementation 
     of its recommendations by the United Nations Security 
     Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the United 
     Nations Human Rights Council, and other multilateral fora;
       Whereas the President instructed the United States Mission 
     to the United Nations and other international organizations 
     in Geneva to vote against resolution A-HRC-S-12-1, which 
     endorsed the report and condemned Israel, at the special 
     session of the Human Rights Council held on October 15-16, 
     2009;
       Whereas, on September 30, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary 
     Clinton described the mandate for the report as ``one-
     sided'';
       Whereas, on September 17, 2009, Ambassador Susan Rice, 
     United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations, 
     expressed the United States' ``very serious concern with the 
     mandate'' and noted that the United States views the mandate 
     ``as unbalanced, one-sided and basically unacceptable'';
       Whereas the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 
     Mission on the Gaza Conflict'' reflects the longstanding, 
     historic bias at the United Nations against the democratic, 
     Jewish State of Israel;
       Whereas the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 
     Mission on the Gaza Conflict'' is being exploited by Israel's 
     enemies to excuse the actions of violent militant groups and 
     their state sponsors, and to justify isolation of and 
     punitive measures against the democratic, Jewish State of 
     Israel;
       Whereas, on October 16, 2009, the United Nations Human 
     Rights Council voted 25-6 (with 11 states abstaining and 5 
     not voting) to adopt resolution A-HRC-S-12-1, which endorsed 
     the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on 
     the Gaza Conflict'' and condemned Israel, without mentioning 
     Hamas, other such violent militant groups, or their state 
     sponsors; and
       Whereas efforts to delegitimize the democratic State of 
     Israel and deny it the right to defend its citizens and its 
     existence can be used to delegitimize other democracies and 
     deny them the same right: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) considers the ``Report of the United Nations Fact 
     Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict'' to be irredeemably 
     biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy;
       (2) supports the Administration's efforts to combat anti-
     Israel bias at the United Nations, its characterization of 
     the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on 
     the Gaza Conflict'' as ``unbalanced, one-sided and basically 
     unacceptable'', and its opposition to the resolution on the 
     report;
       (3) calls on the President and the Secretary of State to 
     continue to strongly and unequivocally oppose any endorsement 
     of the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on 
     the Gaza Conflict'' in multilateral fora, including through 
     leading opposition to any United Nations General Assembly 
     resolution and through vetoing, if necessary, any United 
     Nations Security Council resolution that endorses the 
     contents of this report, seeks to act upon the 
     recommendations contained in this report, or calls on any 
     other international body to take further action regarding 
     this report;
       (4) calls on the President and the Secretary of State to 
     strongly and unequivocally oppose any further consideration 
     of the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on 
     the Gaza Conflict'' and any other measures stemming from this 
     report in multilateral fora; and
       (5) reaffirms its support for the democratic, Jewish State 
     of Israel, for Israel's security and right to self-defense, 
     and, specifically, for Israel's right to defend its citizens 
     from violent militant groups and their state sponsors.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cummings). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and the gentlewoman from Florida 
(Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) each will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire whether the gentlewoman 
from Florida is opposed to the resolution. If she is not, I request the 
time in opposition to the resolution, because I am, in fact, opposed to 
the resolution.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I do not oppose the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota will be 
recognized for 20 minutes in opposition.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to divide my debate 
time equally with the ranking member, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Ros-Lehtinen).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
material on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Klein).
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 867, a 
resolution that calls on the Secretary of State and the President to 
unequivocally oppose further consideration of the Goldstone Report in 
international arenas.
  This resolution sends a clear message to the international community. 
The Goldstone Report does nothing to advance peace and security in the 
Middle East. Rather, it serves to reinforce the deep mistrust that 
pervades the region and excuses the actions of terrorist groups and 
their state sponsors.
  The Goldstone Report ignores the facts. The terrorist threat 
surrounding Israel's defensive actions in Gaza require a decisive 
response, and any sovereign nation would have and should have done what 
Israel did.
  In fact, Richard Goldstone himself said, If this was a court of law, 
there would have been nothing proven. The

[[Page 26558]]

Goldstone Report disregards what it means to fight against terrorists 
who use human shields and have no regard for human life. The findings 
and conclusions of the report have ominous consequences for the United 
States and other countries who seek to prevent terrorist threats from 
taking root around the world.
  We cannot allow the Goldstone Report to set a precedent. The stakes 
are too high. This report was not guided by a commitment to human 
rights but, rather, motivated by a bias against Israel.
  Now is the time for the United Nations to immediately turn its 
attention to the very real human rights violators around the world. 
Human rights victims are pleading for the world's attention. I would 
urge U.N. member states to devote time and thoughts to the realities of 
human rights around the world, not Israel.
  Israel, with strong democratic and judicial institutions, can make 
any necessary determinations about how to move forward from here, and 
it is doing so.
  I would like to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen 
for their leadership in authoring this resolution and bringing it to 
the floor. This is a true example of the importance of bipartisanship, 
because the U.S.-U.N. resolution is strong.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, if I could ask unanimous consent to 
extend the debate time in light of the fact that we have three factions 
asking for time. I would ask for unanimous consent to extend equally 
the debate time, because we have so many requests for time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will entertain that request from 
the manager.
  Mr. BERMAN. Could the gentlewoman, on her unanimous-consent request, 
which is not going to be entertained, yield to me?
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I yield to the gentleman from California for the 
purpose of talking about debate time, not taking from my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. I am told that as much as I would like to, because I am 
flooded with requests for time, and I think it's worthy of a longer 
debate that because of the schedule, the long delay today and the 1-
minutes, the fact that tonight is an election night and a number of 
people have to get back to their districts, I cannot make such a 
unanimous-consent request.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This past winter, Operation Cast Lead in Israel exercised its right 
as a sovereign nation and its obligation to defend its citizens, and 
its very existence, against attacks by Hamas and other violent 
extremist groups in Gaza.
  Israel did so while taking extraordinary measures to minimize the 
risk of civilian casualties. Indeed, as Colonel Richard Kemp, former 
commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, has stated: ``During 
Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard 
the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the 
history of warfare.''
  Then, in January, the Human Rights Council, dominated by 
dictatorships, voted to authorize a so-called fact-finding mission. 
Notably, most free democratic nations did not render their support for 
this sham. The mission's mandate had nothing to do with fact-finding 
and everything to do with persecuting Israel for defending herself. The 
mandate prejudged Israel's guilt, targeted only Israel, and Richard 
Goldstone agreed to head this mission.
  Mr. Goldstone claims that he got the Human Rights Council president 
to modify the mandate. Well, my colleagues, just as the Speaker of the 
House cannot unilaterally change a resolution once adopted, neither 
could the president of the council change the mandate without the 
council's approval. Claims of a revised mandate are false since the 
council did not take any action to approve any modifications.
  Fast forward to September, Mr. Speaker, when the so-called fact-
finding mission released its report. Indeed, it's a 575-page hatchet 
job commonly known as the Goldstone Report.
  While this report contains sweeping accusations that Israel had 
deliberately attacked civilians, in contrast the report disregarded 
evidence that Hamas and other such groups in Gaza used innocents as 
human shields and deliberately launched attacks from schools, from 
hospitals, from mosques. To fully appreciate the Goldstone Report's 
bias, one need only look at the testimony of an Israeli doctor whose 
clinic was hit by a rocket launched from Gaza.
  The doctor, who was severely wounded in the attack and had already 
undergone seven operations to address her injuries, says, ``Judge 
Goldstone, in July you invited me to testify. I told you my story.
  ``I testified in good faith.
  ``But now I see your report. I have to tell you: I am shocked.
  ``Judge Goldstone, in a 500-page report, why did you completely 
ignore my story?
  ``I feel humiliated.
  ``Why are there only two pages about Israeli victims like me, who 
suffered thousands of rockets over 8 years?
  ``Why did you choose to focus on the period of my country's response, 
but not on that of the attacks that caused it?''
  Mr. Goldstone claims that the report never sought to deny Israel its 
right to self-defense, but the report sought to cast Israel's actions 
in response to rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza, not as carefully 
targeted defensive measures, but as the deliberate infliction of 
violence on civilians.
  This is not surprising. The fact-finding mission includes a member 
who, even as the operation was taking place in January of 2009, signed 
a statement entitled, ``Israel's bombardment of Gaza is not self-
defense, it's a war crime.''
  Indeed, this statement began by categorically rejecting Israel's 
right to defend herself against such attacks. Further, the words 
``self-defense'' or similar terms never appear in the report. The 
report recommended further action by multiple U.N. bodies, including 
the General Assembly, the Security Council and International Criminal 
Court. The Human Rights Council has already used this report to condemn 
Israel. No surprise there.
  Tomorrow, the General Assembly will likely to do the same. As Israel 
is being ostracized at the U.N., violent extremists in Gaza continued 
to fire rockets and mortars at innocent Israelis, 265 of the last 9 
months alone. Just yesterday, militants in Gaza fired another rocket, 
which exploded near an Israeli residential area. No surprise there.
  Israel's military intelligence chief testified yesterday that Hamas 
has test-fired a rocket with a 60-kilometer range, far enough to hit 
the Tel Aviv area, threatening up to 3 million Israelis.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  I would like to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen 
for their openness and professionalism in this debate.

                              {time}  1615

  I rise today to urge my colleagues to oppose H. Res. 867, a 
resolution that condemns the Goldstone Report regarding the conflict in 
Gaza. This resolution should be opposed because it suppresses inquiry, 
inquiry that is the hallmark of democratic societies.
  The resolution contains factual errors and undermines Israel's 
ability to conduct its own investigation. The resolution goes against 
President Obama's foreign policy direction. I ask my colleagues to 
review the facts about the Goldstone Report's integrity and the content 
of his report.
  First, what is there to fear about Judge Goldstone? Judge Goldstone 
has a stellar reputation. He is famous for apprehending Nazi criminals 
in Argentina and for serving as a chief prosecutor for the United 
Nations International Criminal Tribunals. He is a self-described 
Zionist. He serves as a trustee at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. 
Judge Goldstone has said that

[[Page 26559]]

bringing war criminals to justice stems from the lessons of the 
Holocaust.
  Unfortunately, the debate about the Goldstone Report has been 
diverted by serious problems with the original U.N. resolution called 
for in the report. I agree that the first U.N. resolution calling for 
an investigation of the Gaza war was one-sided and focused unfairly on 
Israel. Let me repeat: I agree that the original U.N. resolution was 
unfair. But Judge Goldstone pushed back. He succeeded in expanding the 
scope of the mission to include an examination of actions of both Hamas 
and Israel.
  So what does the Goldstone Report really say? Four sections of the 
report deal with abuses by Hamas, including the launching of rockets 
into civilian towns in Israel. The report explicitly states these 
rocket attacks are war crimes. The report recounts actions by Israel in 
Operation Cast Lead that harmed the civilian population in Gaza.
  I repeat the point I started with. The word ``inquiry'' is an 
essential hallmark of democracy, and Israel is strong enough to 
withstand an investigation of its actions in the Gaza war. Hamas should 
investigate its actions as well and be held to account.
  What if Israel would have participated in the review from the 
beginning? It could have pointed out that the United Nations Humans 
Rights Council has a history of unfairly singling Israel out for 
criticism. It could have pointed out the consequences of the Hamas 
rocket attacks.
  Let's consider the following question: Why are we going to pass a 
resolution without holding a single hearing? Why is the House voting 
for a resolution which condemns a report that few Members have fully 
read?
  House Members should know that Israeli leaders, like Deputy Prime 
Minister Dan Meridor, a Likud party member, and National Infrastructure 
Minister Uzi Landau have called for Israel to conduct its own 
investigation.
  I urge Members to oppose this resolution because it will undermine 
President Obama's commitment that all countries, including our own and 
our allies, should be accountable for their actions. This resolution 
complicates the President's current Middle East initiative.
  I conclude with a letter written by Israeli human rights groups who 
oppose the resolution. ``We are concerned that H. Res. 867 may derail 
the momentum towards an Israeli investigation. Resolution 867 contains 
factual inaccuracies, both about the Goldstone Report and the measures 
taken by Israel to date, that must not guide choices by policymakers. 
We urge interested parties and Members of the House to show their 
support for the internal democratic conversation taking place in Israel 
today and to call on Israel to demonstrate that it can ensure genuine 
accountability at home.''
  When nations like the United States, Israel, South Africa, and others 
have pursued truthful investigation, however uncomfortable, their 
people have emerged stronger. The House of Representatives is poised to 
condemn the Goldstone Report today because the report says that both 
parties to the conflict engaged in possible violations of international 
law. What is the logic of the action? How does it advance the cause of 
peace in the Middle East?
  I urge my colleagues to look closely at the Goldstone Report, which 
is right here on this table, and what actions truly advance the cause 
of peace.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a member 
of the committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I rise to support 
the resolution.
  We should reject the Goldstone Report, which is part of an ongoing 
effort at the U.N. to single out Israel and to deny Israel the same 
rights accorded to other nations.
  For example, of the 34 motions adopted by the so-called U.N. Human 
Rights Council since its inception in 2006, 27 of them are directed at 
Israel. I might say that these paragons of democracy on this Human 
Rights Council are Libya, Syria, and other dictatorships.
  The report equates Israel's long-delayed acts of self-defense with 
Hamas' 12,000 intentional, indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians 
since 2001.
  The report ignores the well-documented, unprecedented efforts by 
Israel to limit civilian casualties in Gaza neighborhoods where they 
were being used as human shields by the terrorists.
  Finally, the report fails to assign appropriate responsibility to 
Hamas for its decision to base itself and its military operations in 
heavily civilian-populated areas.
  This Congress should stand by the only democracy in the Middle East, 
Israel, and should reject the biased Goldstone Report.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am so honored to yield 
1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor), our well-
respected and esteemed Republican whip.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from Florida.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of this resolution. More 
importantly, I stand to support the right of democracies to defend 
their citizens against terrorism.
  For years, without provocation, Hamas and other terrorists in Gaza 
launched thousands of deadly rockets at Israeli civilians. The attacks 
laid siege to entire swaths of Israelis. By last December, Israel said 
enough was enough.
  When it entered Gaza, Israel found a ruthless enemy hiding in 
civilian areas. Hamas committed blatant war crimes by using the 
Palestinian people as human shields. But the one-sided and biased 
Goldstone Commission isn't concerned with any of this. Its report 
equates a democracy's defensive strikes on armed targets with a terror 
group's deliberate efforts to kill and sacrifice innocent people.
  The Goldstone Report does not contribute to the ongoing peace 
process. The cases of Gaza and Lebanon show that every time Israel 
makes concessions of peace, it results in increased terrorism. Why 
would Israel agree to deal if it knows the international community will 
demonize it should it have to respond to terror?
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Ms. 
Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I rise in opposition to H. Res. 867. The United States has a 
responsibility to engage in tough and in honest diplomatic efforts for 
peace as a purveyor of human rights and the rule of law in the Middle 
East and throughout the world.
  The Goldstone Report raises many questions, its most critical 
recommendation being that both parties, mind you, both parties conduct 
their own impartial investigation to find answers.
  Neither a dismissal nor an endorsement of the Goldstone Report will 
change the facts on the ground for Israelis and Palestinians who 
continue to struggle for a life of normalcy and peace.
  Indiscriminate rocket attacks launched by Hamas against Israel have 
terrorized and killed innocent Israelis, leaving entire communities in 
grips of fear. The United States and the international community have 
consistently condemned these attacks and reaffirmed Israel's right to 
self-defense.
  The tragic deaths of innocent civilians in Gaza and the devastation 
brought upon their homes, schools, and infrastructure has worsened a 
humanitarian crisis that cannot be ignored. Residents of Gaza and the 
West Bank continue to lack appropriate access to the most fundamental 
needs, including food, fuel, water, sanitation, education, health care, 
and the basic materials needed to rebuild their communities.
  The urgency and the gravity of these harsh realities on both sides 
require that Congress act always with an eye toward peace and 
reconciliation. In the words of President Obama in Cairo in June of 
2009, he said, ``All of us have a responsibility to work for the day 
when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children 
grow up without fear.''
  As Members of Congress, we can never hesitate or shy away from 
defending the United States' indispensable role in the peace process if 
we

[[Page 26560]]

hope to achieve these goals. This resolution does not bring us closer 
to realizing a two-state solution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlelady's time has expired.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield an additional 5 seconds.
  Ms. LEE of California. It doesn't lead us to securing Israeli peace 
and security nor Palestinian peaceful coexistence and for their 
citizens a life of respect.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a 
unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to explain why I will vote ``no'' on House 
Resolution 867, which calls on President Obama and Secretary of State 
Clinton to ``oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further 
consideration'' of what has become known as the ``Goldstone Report.''
  The United States' connection to the State of Israel is both strong 
and deep; we are connected through decades of history, culture, 
business and geo-political interests. We care about the people of 
Israel who strive for what we have struggled for in the United States--
the ability to live in security, peace and prosperity. The well-being 
of our friends in Israel was, is and will remain an American priority. 
As Israel's closest ally, we have an obligation to see to it that 
Israel and its neighbors reach a peaceful end to ongoing conflict.
  The situation in Gaza is a tragedy, both for Israelis who for too 
long suffered from indiscriminant rocket attacks and for the hundreds 
of innocent Palestinians in Gaza who lost their lives, their loved 
ones, their homes, and their faith in the international community 
during Israel's military offensive last December.
  And so now the world is grappling with the report on the Gaza war, 
submitted by the highly respected Judge Richard Goldstone--a self 
described Zionist, a trustee of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and 
a man widely known for his integrity, fairness, and conscientiousness, 
who investigated war crimes in Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and Kosovo and who 
uncovered Nazi war criminals in Argentina.
  But, rather than deal seriously with the contents and recommendations 
of the report, rather than ask Judge Goldstone to testify before 
Congress, so we can debate specifically what sections may be valid or 
flawed, we are seeking with this resolution to foreclose all discussion 
and action on the report by our President and our Secretary of State, 
in every multinational forum.
  One of the arguments supporters of this resolution make is that the 
report is one-sided, representing only the Palestinian point-of-view. 
That argument would have some validity if not for the fact that (a) the 
report strongly accuses Hamas of indiscriminate rocket attacks on 
Israeli citizens, referring to their actions as a ``war crime'' and (b) 
the Israeli Government chose not to participate, going so far as to 
block Judge Goldstone and his team from entering Israel to conduct 
their investigation. This forced Israeli citizens who were invited to 
testify in front of Judge Goldstone, including Noam Shalit, the father 
of imprisoned IDF soldier Gil'ad Shalit, to travel to Switzerland and 
Jordan to provide their perspectives on the Gaza operation.
  This resolution is a deliberate diversion, taking Congress' attention 
away from what should be our main focus. The bottom line is that the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a tragedy that begs for real engagement 
and real solutions. The resolution before us today offers neither. 
Instead, it seeks to deflect our attention from what we should be 
considering: how to reinvigorate the stalled peace process and help 
Israelis and Palestinians navigate a path towards a two-state solution. 
I challenge Congress and the committees of jurisdiction to invest their 
time and resources into more constructive efforts that further the 
cause of peace.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a 
distinguished member of our committee, the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms. 
Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for 
his leadership on this issue, and I thank my friend Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 
for introducing this important resolution.
  Today, the American people stand with the State of Israel and all 
other peace-loving nations and people who face the threat of terrorism 
and are forced to defend their innocent citizens from terrorist 
attacks.
  In 2005, Israel withdrew from the Gaza to allow the Palestinians to 
begin building a state. They didn't. Instead, Hamas used the Gaza to 
terrorize the Palestinian people and as a launch pad to rain missiles 
on Israeli cities, 8,000 rocket attacks in a 3-year period. The U.N. 
was silent.
  In the fall of 2008, even more rockets fell on innocent Israelis and 
the situation became untenable. And the U.N. was silent. Only when 
Israel retaliated in order to protect its own citizens did the U.N. 
speak up, to condemn Israel.
  For those who suggest that Israel used disproportionate force, I say 
Israel used extraordinary restraint: missile after missile, injury 
after injury, death after death, and year after year.
  Today, we stand up for justice and the right of all nations to act in 
self-defense, to protect innocent civilians and end the horrors of 
terrorism. Let's put the blame where it belongs, with Hamas and the 
terrorists, not Israel.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to my 
good friend from Indiana, Mr. Burton, the ranking member on the 
Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia of our Foreign Affairs 
Committee.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
  Israel has been our friend forever. They have been attacked again and 
again and again. So what did they do? Ariel Sharon tried to reach out 
in a peaceful way to give Gaza back to the Palestinians. And what 
happened? Hamas goes in there and starts launching missile after 
missile after missile at innocent people, blowing them up, trying to 
kill them. They want to destroy Israel, as does Iran. So what happens?
  The Human Rights Council of the United Nations 27 times has issued 
decisions against Israel, and the Goldstone Report is just another in a 
long line. This is something that we should not tolerate. There 
shouldn't be one vote, not one vote in this place against Israel.
  And the people who are making these comments on the other side of the 
aisle really bother me, because Israel has been such a great friend of 
ours and they have been trying to reach peace over there forever. And, 
instead, they keep getting rocket attack after rocket attack, and then 
they are criticized for human rights problems because they defend 
themselves.
  If we launched missiles into Michigan, I guarantee you, Michigan 
would be really ticked off at us and would want to stop it and would do 
everything they could to stop it.
  We ought to support Israel.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
  Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the gentleman.
  Well, I do support Israel, and I intend to vote ``present'' on this 
particular resolution because, like most Members, I haven't had time to 
read 575 pages.
  We often speak about process in this body and it is a concept we all 
embrace, at least rhetorically. But on this occasion, we only have the 
rhetoric, and the process has been totally inadequate.
  This resolution came to the floor on suspension without a hearing, 
despite the willingness of Judge Goldstone to come before the United 
States Congress and answer any questions that we might pose to him. And 
that judge, by the way, is highly regarded in the international rights 
community for his courage, impartiality and scholarship. He has 
participated in a number of high profile inquiries, including 
investigation into Nazism in Argentina.
  As the gentleman from Minnesota indicated, he is a self-described 
Zionist. As both the Chair of the full committee and the Chair of the 
Subcommittee on the Middle East indicated, they have the utmost respect 
for Judge Goldstone.
  He has expressed his strong concerns about this resolution, and he 
said this: ``I have strong reservations about the text of the 
resolution in question, text that includes serious factual inaccuracies 
and instances where information and statements are taken grossly out of 
context.'' Last night, we received in the form of a ``Dear Colleague'' 
a response by Chairmen Berman and Ackerman that attempted to refute it.

[[Page 26561]]

  Clearly, we need more discussion and more debate. An opportunity to 
have that discussion should have occurred prior to this resolution 
coming to the floor.

                              {time}  1630

  This is not about bias against Israel.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Lee of California). The time of the 
gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman 10 additional 
seconds.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. We know that exists. This is not about Hamas. They have 
committed horrific acts of terrorism against citizens. This is about 
us. This is about us.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to my 
good friend, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), a member of the 
Agriculture, Transportation, and Veterans' Affairs Committees. A busy 
man.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Madam Speaker, the Goldstone Report is a 
dangerous document that makes no distinction between terrorism and the 
acts of a nation to defend its people. For years terrorists launched 
rockets at Israeli civilians. Israel responded with a defensive measure 
to clear a terrorist threat and protect the lives of its citizens.
  The Goldstone Report ignores Israel's right to self-defense. Despite 
Israel's efforts to avoid civilian casualties and its humanitarian 
assistance to civilians, the report unfairly accuses Israel of war 
crimes. Israel sought to limit its actions to military targets. Yet 
terrorists hid behind civilians, near hospitals, schools, and mosques.
  Every nation should be alarmed at the report and its implications. 
All nations, including Israel, have the right to defend their people.
  I urge my colleagues to stand with Israel in recognition of this 
right, this basic right, of self-defense.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
the State of Washington (Mr. Baird).
  Mr. BAIRD. I thank my colleague from Minnesota for his leadership.
  My friends who have described the Goldstone Report, as a colleague 
just did, I'm not sure if they have read it. I have read it. It is not 
at all silent on whether or not Israel had a reason to respond. It 
specifically talks about the unacceptability of Hamas rocketing Israeli 
citizens.
  Here's a picture of Israeli kids in Sderot, hiding, practicing how to 
deal with those rockets. It is absolutely unacceptable that any people 
have to undergo this kind of attack; and the Goldstone Report is, in 
fact, quite clear on that. And contrary to this resolution and contrary 
to what some of my colleagues said, it is explicit about suggesting 
that Hamas may have engaged in war crimes.
  But there is another side to this story. I have twin 4-year-old boys 
at home. When I kiss them goodnight, they look for all the world like 
these three little Palestinian children. I don't know that father, but 
I can imagine his grief.
  We must not say that this Congress will unequivocally oppose any 
consideration of a report by a jurist of this integrity and this 
reputation. Those children deserve someone to ask why they died, just 
as these children in Sderot deserve someone to say they must not be 
rocketed. And the Goldstone Report does both. It does both.
  Unlike most of my colleagues here, I have been to Gaza and I have 
read in its entirety the Goldstone Report. And I will tell you he says 
many things that, though unpleasant, are true and must not be 
obstructed.
  There used to be a school in Gaza called the American International 
School. The motto of that school: ``Peace, Understanding, and 
Leadership Through Education.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 
seconds.
  Mr. BAIRD. This is a picture of what happened to that school. This is 
a picture of what happened to that school.
  Do not pass this resolution. Support this fine jurist. Give justice, 
true justice, a chance to be heard.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I'm proud to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe), a member of the Agriculture, 
Education, and Veterans' Affairs Committees. Another very busy man.
  Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
House Resolution 867, which condemns the United Nations Human Rights 
Council's decision to endorse the views of the Goldstone Report. Among 
its conclusions was an assertion that the Israeli military campaign was 
aimed at civilians in Gaza rather than the terrorist group Hamas. The 
assertion itself is outrageous, but the fact that it was endorsed by an 
arm of the United Nations should be a cause for concern for anyone 
who's concerned about terrorism or human rights.
  In criticizing Israel's behavior and not even mentioning Hamas in 
this resolution, the council essentially endorsed Hamas's decision to 
use Gazans as human shields to protect themselves from retaliation for 
their rocket attacks into Israel.
  The fact is that the Human Rights Council is no better than its 
predecessor at the U.N., the Human Rights Commission, when it comes to 
anti-Israeli rhetoric. I think the resolution correctly urges the Obama 
administration and Secretary Clinton to strongly condemn this report, 
but I further urge them to reconsider their decision to participate in 
and fund the HRC. This body has proven time and again that they are 
incapable of acting without bias and simply gives a forum for anti-
Israeli and anti-U.S. voices to be heard.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan, Mr. John Dingell.
  Mr. DINGELL. This is a bad bill. It's a bad resolution. It is unfair. 
It is unwise. It contributes nothing to peace. It establishes a bad 
precedent, and it sets up a set of circumstances where we indicate that 
we're going to just arbitrarily reject a U.N. finding and a U.N. 
resolution and that we're going to have that as a precedent. This is 
bad.
  What we must do here is to make the United States a fair, honest, 
respected broker. This does not do this. It leaves the United States in 
real danger of losing the ability to participate actively in the 
creation of a lasting peace of benefit to both Israel and to the 
Palestinians.
  If you're a friend of Israel, if you're a friend of world peace, if 
you're a friend of peace in the Mid East, if you're a friend of the 
Palestinians, if you want to look to the well-being of the United 
States, you should reject this resolution. It is a bad proposal. There 
have been no hearings on it. We do not know what underlies all of the 
circumstances, and I urge the House to reject it.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 867. This resolution, 
though non-binding, sends a signal to the world that the United States 
Congress is not serious about pushing the Israelis and the Palestinians 
toward a peaceful resolution.
  It is true that the body that mandated the Report of the United 
Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, known as the 
Goldstone Report, has been no friend to Israel. Indeed the United 
Nations Human Rights Council has consistently passed one- sided biased 
resolutions against Israel while, at the same time, allowing 
documented, blatant human rights violators to preside over that body 
without criticism. It is right for the United States and other friends 
of Israel to question and call out the why six of ten special sessions 
of the U.N. General Assembly have been about Israel, while none have 
been called on Tibet or Darfur.
  However, we must ask ourselves, does this resolution bring us closer 
to peace in the Middle East? Does it spur negotiations between the 
Israelis, Palestinians, and other parties, or does it marginalize and 
itself choose sides? We must ask, are we undermining President Obama's, 
Secretary Clinton's, Special Envoy Mitchell's efforts to serve as an 
honest broker, bring the two sides together, and achieve peace, by 
passing this resolution?
  Madam Speaker, Israel, unequivocally, has a right to defend itself 
against those who seek

[[Page 26562]]

to destroy it. We know that Israel was relentlessly attacked by rockets 
and mortars leading up to the Gaza war. They made the calculation that 
they could not allow Hamas to continue this violence and abuse.
  However, neither Israel nor Hamas, nor any other country or other 
non-state political act is exempt from international human rights laws 
or free of consequence for violations of them. If nothing else, the 
Goldstone Report should serve as a document from which Israel and 
Hamas, and the rest of the international community can use to ensure 
that future human rights violations do not take place in civilian areas 
and that their militaries and fighters are actively working toward 
minimizing civilian casualties in the future.
  Madam Speaker, time and again we acknowledge the urgency of this 
conflict. The Obama Administration is working feverishly with both 
sides toward a peaceful resolution, a two-state solution. Let us not 
undermine this effort today. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting 
``no'' on this resolution.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Today we journey from Operation Cast Lead to Operation 
Cast Doubt. Almost as serious as committing war crimes is covering up 
war crimes, pretending that war crimes were never committed and did not 
exist.
  Because behind every such deception is the nullification of humanity, 
the destruction of human dignity, the annihilation of the human spirit, 
the triumph of Orwellian thinking, the eternal prison of the dark heart 
of the totalitarian.
  The resolution before us today, which would reject all attempts of 
the Goldstone Report to fix responsibility to all parties to war 
crimes, including both Hamas and Israel, may as well be called the 
``Down is Up, Night is Day, Wrong is Right'' resolution.
  Because if this Congress votes to condemn a report it has not read 
concerning events it has totally ignored about violations of law of 
which it is unaware, it will have brought shame to this great 
institution.
  How can we ever expect there to be peace in the Middle East if we 
tacitly approve of violations of international law and international 
human rights, if we look the other way, or if we close our eyes to the 
heartbreak of people on both sides by white-washing a legitimate 
investigation?
  How can we protect the people of Israel from existential threats if 
we hold no concern for the protection of the Palestinians, for their 
physical security, their right to land, their right to their own homes, 
their right to water, their right to sustenance, their right to freedom 
of movement, their right to human security of jobs, education, and 
health care?
  We will have peace only when the plight of both Palestinians and 
Israelis is brought before this House and given equal consideration in 
recognition of the principle that all people on this planet have a 
right to survive and thrive. And it is our responsibility, our duty to 
see that no individual, no group, no people are barred from this humble 
human claim.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding. I thank the ranking 
member, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, for introducing and working with the chairman 
on this resolution.
  I rise to voice my objection to the unfair, unbalanced, and 
inaccurate report of the United Nations fact-finding mission on the 
Gaza conflict, otherwise known as the Goldstone Report.
  The report not only paints a distorted picture of Israel's legitimate 
efforts at self-defense, in my opinion, but it epitomizes the practice 
of singling Israel out from all other nations for condemnation.
  The Goldstone Report does little to build confidence that the U.N. or 
its Human Rights Council can deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 
in an evenhanded manner. I agree with those who spoke before me that it 
ought to, but the Goldstone Report does not give us much confidence 
that that's what's happening.
  For one, the Human Rights Council's mandate for the report 
specifically targeted Israeli actions, ignoring, ignoring the 
deliberate Hamas attacks on civilians that provoked Israel's self-
defense in Operation Cast Lead.
  The report's lead author himself, Justice Richard Goldstone of South 
Africa, objected to that one-sided Band-Aid. Let me repeat that. 
Goldstone himself, when the commission issued its report, objected to 
that one-sided mandate that they issued. But notwithstanding his 
objection, it was not formally altered.
  Similarly, former U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, whom many 
of you know, Mary Robinson, not known as a great defender of Israel, 
Mary Robinson, who has criticized Israel's record in the past, also 
objected to this one-sided mandate. In her words, and I quote Mary 
Robinson: ``Unfortunately, the Human Rights Council passed a resolution 
seeking a fact-finding mission to only look at what Israel has done, 
and I don't think that's the human rights approach,'' said Mary 
Robinson.

                              {time}  1645

  Secretary of State Clinton agrees. She said this:
  ``We believe that the mandate for the Goldstone Report was one-sided 
and that many of the recommendations are appropriately dealt with by 
the institutions within Israel.''
  And, indeed, if they were not, I would be here to say that we ought 
to support the United Nations' actions. The Goldstone Report largely 
neglects the context within which Israel's action took place. Why is 
that context so vital, and why is the report so empty without it? 
Because for years--for years--Israel has been the target of 
asymmetrical warfare for terrorists who hide behind civilians and aim 
to kill civilians. For 8 years before Operation Cast Lead, Hamas, aided 
by Iran and others, launched deadly rockets and mortar fire into 
Israel, even after Israel dismantled its Gaza settlements, even after 
it withdrew its military. More than 6,000 rockets have fallen 
indiscriminately on southern Israel's cities and towns. I can't imagine 
there is one of us in this Chamber that if Canada or Mexico rained down 
six missiles on our civilian population--not 6,000 on our population--
that there would be a Member here who would not want decisive response 
to stop that assault. Each was intended to kill the maximum number of 
civilians. These rockets did not target military targets. They targeted 
civilians. How do I know? I've been there, and I have seen the 
effectiveness firsthand of the fear that has been put in the minds of 
the people of Sderot and others.
  In the Israeli town of Sderot, I saw children who had lost literally 
the ability to speak, who no longer had control over their bodily 
functions, who were condemned to play in an armored playground from 
fear of the rockets that could kill with only seconds' warning. There 
is no military establishment in Sderot. Families, children. That is the 
context of which the Goldstone Report makes such short shrift.
  Tragically, civilians in Gaza suffered and continue to suffer. They 
suffer in major part from the determination of their imposed leaders to 
pursue indiscriminate terror. I have had a discussion with my friend 
Mr. Kucinich, for whom I have a great deal of respect. We ought to have 
great empathy for the Palestinian people who have been put at great 
risk by their leaders pursuing terrorism. We ought to have empathy for 
those children who live in the camps in Gaza. Terrible condition. I've 
been there. Is there anybody here who doubts that if those children 
living there for decade after decade after decade were European 
children or American children or Jewish children that they would still 
be there in those camps? I say to you, not the case. Why are they 
there? Because the Arab community does not want to absorb them, and 
their leaders will not seek a meaningful peace. That is why they're 
there.
  Hamas, like its state sponsors, is notorious for using men, women and 
children as human shields and political props. As Secretary of State

[[Page 26563]]

Condoleezza Rice put it earlier this year, ``Hamas has held the people 
of Gaza hostage.'' They still do. Should we have empathy for those 
young people and not so young people held hostage? Absolutely, we 
should. Should we act to help their plight? Absolutely, we should. But 
that does not mean we ought to rationalize terrorists who attack 
children in Sderot or any other place. Hamas continues to hold them 
hostage, likely subjecting the Goldstone Report's Palestinian witnesses 
to intimidation and threats, a possibility that the report does not 
take into account, of course.
  Unlike Hamas and its sponsors, Israel is a democracy with an 
independent judiciary, and all of us know that that judiciary 
frequently has said to the military and to the Israel Government, you 
cannot do this. You did it wrong. You're going to be held accountable. 
There is nothing like that in Gaza, little like that in the West Bank, 
although the West Bank is getting better. Its security is increasing. 
Abbas and Fayad are making progress. It is fully investigating its 
military for any--I am going back to Israel now--for any human rights 
violations that may have been committed in Gaza. That is appropriate. 
They ought to do that. Tragically, we know that when men and, indeed, 
women go to war, that there are those who do not always act properly on 
both sides. We need to hold that conduct accountable.
  I believe in the integrity of Israel's investigations because I 
believe in its legitimacy as a democratic state, but I do not accept 
the legitimacy of singling out Israel for biased censure. It is 
essential to hold every nation to international norms of behavior in 
peace as well as in war. Israel must be held to the same standards as 
any other nation. It holds itself to such standards, I would add, even 
when its enemies do not. Indeed, few nations constrain themselves more 
than Israel, but no other nation has so many in the U.N. eager to 
condemn it, irrespective of facts and justification.
  Soon, the U.N. General Assembly will vote on endorsing the Goldstone 
Report. Goldstone himself said that their report was not a fair report, 
but by doing so and by condemning Israel, the U.N. would also be 
threatening the just self-defense of any state endangered by 
asymmetrical warfare.
  I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself my remaining time.
  We must recognize what is at stake here. The Goldstone Report asked 
for this matter to be considered by the International Criminal Court, 
equating Israel with the genocidal regime in Sudan. Today enemies of 
freedom seek to haul democratic, political and military leaders of 
Israel before an unaccountable court for defending their nation against 
Hamas, but how long before U.S. officials will have to face the same 
persecution for defending our Nation against al Qaeda or any other such 
threat?
  Madam Speaker, the way forward is obvious. We must support the right 
of all democracies to defend ourselves and our citizens. We must 
reaffirm our support for Israel and her efforts to defend herself from 
violent Islamic militants and their state sponsors. We must oppose any 
attempts to grant consideration or endorsement to this irredeemably 
biased Goldstone Report.
  House Resolution 867 achieves these goals, and 170 of our colleagues 
who cosponsored it agreed. My colleagues, we have a choice to make: 
stand with free democratic nations or send a message to those who seek 
Israel and America's destruction that they can continue unhampered as 
the U.N. and its apologists sweep under the proverbial rug incessant 
attacks like the ones Hamas and other violent extremists launched from 
Gaza against Israel. The choice is clear. Support this resolution.
  Mr. ELLISON. May I inquire as to time, Madam Speaker?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 6\1/4\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentlelady from Minnesota, 
Congresswoman McCollum.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, this resolution harms U.S. national 
security interests in the Middle East. The U.S. is attempting to be an 
honest broker in the Israeli-Palestine peace process, yet this 
resolution is blatantly biased, and it damages U.S. credibility.
  This resolution seeks to hide the ugliness of the Gaza war by 
covering up violent excesses committed against innocent civilians by 
both Hamas and the Israeli Defense Forces. Why does the U.S. House want 
to reject an accounting of Hamas' terrorism against Israeli civilians, 
as if thousands of rockets were not fired at Israel? And why would this 
resolution want to deny that hundreds of Palestinian women and children 
and elders were needlessly killed?
  American-made white phosphorous shells were used by Israel in 
civilian areas, causing horrible burns to Palestinian children, yet 
this resolution refuses to seek the truth. The report Congress is 
burying today was led by a former chief prosecutor who has faced far 
tougher actors than the critics in this Chamber, critics who have not 
held one single hearing.
  There must be only one standard for respecting human rights, a single 
standard by which we must hold ourselves and our friends and our 
adversaries accountable.
  Madam Speaker, this resolution harms U.S. national security interests 
in the Middle East and American leadership for human rights and 
humanitarian law. And, while the U.S. attempts to be an honest-broker 
in an Israeli-Palestinian peace process this resolution is blatantly 
biased and damages U.S. credibility.
  This resolution seeks to hide the ugliness of the Gaza war by 
covering-up the violent excesses committed against innocent civilians 
by Hamas and the Israeli Defense Forces.
  Why does the U.S. House want to reject an accounting of Hamas's 
terrorism against Israeli civilians as if thousands of rockets were not 
fired at Israel?
  Why does this resolution want to deny that hundreds of Palestinian 
women and elders were needlessly killed by the IDF?
  American-made white phosphorus shells were used by Israel in civilian 
areas causing horrible burns to Palestinian children, yet this 
resolution refuses to seek the truth?
  The report Congress is burying today was led by a former chief 
prosecutor for war crimes in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, a jurist 
of exceptional experience who has faced far tougher actors than his 
critics in this Chamber, critics who have not held a single hearing or 
conducted a single fact-finding mission on the subject of his report.
  There must be only one standard for respecting human rights, a single 
standard by which we must hold ourselves, our friends, and our 
adversaries accountable. Establishing situational standards for 
respecting human rights is dishonest and only encourages actions that 
destroy human dignity and life.
  Therefore I agree with U.N. Secretary Ban Ki-moon who recently said 
at the Anti-Defamation League's annual dinner that he is ``a friend who 
is acutely aware of Israel's security needs.'' But on the issue of the 
Goldstone report Secretary Ban said, ``When human rights are violated 
anywhere in the world we need accountability.''
  Today, I would ask my colleagues to vote for human rights and 
accountability by voting against this resolution.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I plan to be the last speaker. Correct me 
if I am wrong, but I understand that under the rules, I have the right 
to close, so I will reserve my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. 
Edwards).
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my 
sincere disappointment that my colleagues and I are once again in a 
very untenable position on such a critical issue facing our country, 
our ally Israel, the Palestinian people and the global community.
  House Resolution 867 is just the wrong resolution yet again at this 
time. The U.N. General Assembly takes up this business tomorrow, and I 
think it's really important for us to note that the Congress gets one 
shot, one shot, to address the shortcomings of the mandate for the 
inquiry, the pitfalls of the Goldstone Report, and one shot to call on 
the Palestinians and Israelis to conduct their independent 
investigations and to stand for human rights and international law.
  David Ben-Gurion once said, ``Without moral and intellectual 
independence, there is no anchor for national

[[Page 26564]]

independence,'' and I think we should heed that today. I say it's the 
wrong resolution because it's our opportunity actually to get it right 
in a new direction for the Middle East. Regrettably, in this flawed 
process, we are tarnishing the reputation of one of the greatest 
advocates for human rights of our time, Justice Richard Goldstone. As a 
member of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, I believe we should 
have and the oversight committees of jurisdiction should have extended 
to Justice Goldstone the courtesy of inviting him to present his 
findings on the record. We didn't. We did not extend to the Israeli 
Government the courtesy of explaining on the record the shortcomings 
they find in this report.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield the gentlelady an additional 5 seconds.
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I want to just communicate that it's really 
important for us to get it right, and I appreciate the leadership of 
Chairman Berman. I look forward to us working in the future for 
something that actually does lead to peace.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my sincere disappointment that 
my colleagues and I are once again in an untenable position on such a 
critical issue facing our country, facing our ally Israel, the 
Palestinian people and the global community.
  This resolution, H. Res. 867, is the wrong resolution at this time. 
The U.N. General Assembly takes up this business tomorrow. Our Nation 
will be speaking in defense and support of Israel. It is important to 
note, that while we are united in our support for Israel and the 
Palestinian people, this Congress gets one shot to address the 
shortcomings of the mandate for the inquiry and the pitfalls of the 
Goldstone report. We also get only one shot to call on the Palestinians 
and the Israelis to conduct their own independent inquiries, to stand 
up in defense of human rights and international law, and to investigate 
wrongdoing by all parties with the objective of ensuring that it does 
not happen again.
  David Ben-Gurion once said, ``without moral and intellectual 
independence, there is no anchor for national independence.'' I believe 
that Israel operates under that spirit today; I am encouraged that 
there is a robust dialogue within the country over the Gaza war. It is 
important that this dialogue continues and Israel is allowed to pursue 
the rule of law unhampered. Now is the appropriate time for the 
Palestinians to take additional steps to eschew violence and operate 
with moral and intellectual independence. This will provide additional 
support to their calls for national independence. They can do this by 
conducting their own inquiry and investigate the allegations against 
entities in Gaza.
  I say this is the wrong resolution because it fails to call for 
independent investigations by the Israelis and Palestinians. This was 
our opportunity to get it right and when this resolution passes, we 
will have gotten it wrong. It will be a missed opportunity to move 
closer to achieving a two-state solution. Regrettably, in this flawed 
process, we are tarnishing the reputation of one of the greatest 
advocates for human rights of our time, Justice Richard Goldstone. As a 
member of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, I believe we should 
have, and the oversight committees of jurisdiction should have extended 
to Justice Goldstone the courtesy of inviting him to present his 
findings on the record. We didn't. We did not extend to the Israeli 
Government the courtesy of explaining, on the record, the shortcomings 
they find in this report. By not taking these actions we have now been 
forced to consider a poorly constructed resolution at the eleventh hour 
just before our U.N. delegation presents its case to the General 
Assembly. Further, this resolution actually calls on the administration 
to not go to the U.N. tomorrow as it is so broad that it calls on the 
President and Secretary of State to ``oppose unequivocally any 
endorsement or further consideration of the Goldstone report in 
multilateral fora''. Unfortunately, these mixed messages and 
inconsistencies damage this resolution and the lack of due diligence 
risks a diminished reputation of this body in the international arena.
  As I stand right now I want to communicate to the United Nations that 
enough is enough: It is inappropriate to create a mandate that is so 
easily impeachable. However, I find it difficult to abide with a 
resolution that I find so deeply flawed and as one-sided as some 
suggest of the Goldstone Report.
  I know that these issues are difficult, and I want to thank Chairman 
Berman; while I disagree with many points in this resolution, I 
appreciate his leadership on this issue. I appreciate that we will be 
standing united behind our President as we work toward a lasting two-
state solution to find peace for Israel and her people and a homeland 
for Palestinians.
  Mr. ELLISON. I would like to inquire as to the time remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota has 4 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, let's be clear about what 
we're debating here. Nobody in this Chamber disputes Israel's right to 
defend itself against attacks by Hamas and other terrorist 
organizations, and neither does the report issued by Justice Goldstone. 
The report instead examines the conduct of the war by both sides, 
including a detailed chapter on the savage rocket attacks launched from 
Gaza into southern Israel, which it describes as ``serious war crimes'' 
and possibly ``crimes against humanity.''
  Nobody here is defending one-sided mandates either:
  But in the interest of full disclosure, critics should note that 
Justice Goldstone insisted on a rewritten and balanced mandate before 
he took on the assignment.
  Nobody here is disputing the obligation of the U.S. to insist that 
any resolution debated by the U.N. be fair and balanced and to vote 
against or veto it otherwise. But there is a crucial distinction 
between criticizing the way in which the Goldstone Report was handled 
at the U.N. and criticizing the very existence of the report in the 
first place, which is exactly what this resolution does. Conflating the 
two does a disservice to a respected jurist who has devoted his life to 
upholding international norms of justice and human rights, and more 
importantly, it may damage future efforts to hold countries accountable 
through international investigations.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield the gentleman 15 additional seconds.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Finally, bringing this resolution up at 
this time and in this manner could have implications for the 
possibility of internal investigations into the conflict by the parties 
themselves. That is a central recommendation of the Goldstone Report as 
well as the Obama administration and prominent Israeli officials and 
Israeli human rights organizations. Israel is a strong and resilient 
democracy. Successfully investigating this episode could only make it 
stronger. We shouldn't pass a resolution now which could actually slow 
or stop the wheels of justice.
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California, Congresswoman Capps.
  Mrs. CAPPS. I thank my colleague for yielding, Madam Speaker.
  I rise to express my opposition to the resolution before us. Sadly, I 
think that in this body's haste, we've overlooked some of the depth of 
unspeakable tragedies that have occurred during the war on Gaza. 
Innocent Israeli and Palestinian lives were lost. We owe it to all 
victims' families to vow to do everything in our power to prevent 
further tragedy. Instead, we have a flawed resolution before us.
  As an example, the text of the resolution focuses on the original 
mandate of the report, not the mission that was actually carried out by 
the investigators. I am disappointed the committee chose to ignore the 
fact that Justice Goldstone did not agree to take on the investigation 
until it was agreed to that the conduct of all parties would be 
investigated. This is just one of many parts of the resolution.
  The United States will remain a true friend to our ally Israel 
without passing a resolution that has questionable accuracy and 
motives. So let us call for an open and honest debate with the 
reputable Judge Goldstone. Let us not act in haste to pass a resolution 
that will in no way achieve our ultimate goal of achieving a lasting 
peace for Israelis and Palestinians.

[[Page 26565]]



                              {time}  1700

  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, this resolution should not be coming 
before us. I agree that there is an anti-Israel bias at the United 
Nations. But at this moment in history, it should be the responsibility 
of every Member of this House to help bring the parties in the conflict 
in the Middle East back to the negotiating table.
  We need to resurrect and advance a peace process, so that rockets 
never again fall on innocent Israeli civilians and the terror of Gaza 
is not repeated. This resolution does not do that. This resolution 
heightens the rhetoric of division.
  Regardless of what you think of the Goldstone Report, it makes an 
important recommendation: that it is incumbent upon both Israel and the 
Palestinians, in particular Hamas, to carry out credible investigations 
into actions by their forces that led to the harm and loss of 
civilians.
  I regret that we are not calling upon all parties to return to the 
peace table so that the rockets and bombs may be silenced in the Middle 
East, once and for all.
  I regret that this resolution is on the House floor increasing the 
politicization and the polarization and the heated rhetoric so 
characteristic of the crisis in the Middle East.
  So, Madam Speaker, I will vote ``no'' today on this resolution.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I am going to take the balance of my time 
to close. As I do, I would like to first of all have entered into the 
Record a letter from Israeli human rights organizations, including 
B'Tselem, Gisha, the Public Committee Against Torture, Rabbis for Human 
Rights, and Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights.

     In regards to: House Resolution 867 regarding the Goldstone 
         Commission report on Operation Cast Lead.
     To: Interested Persons.
     From: Israeli Human Rights organizations.
       To Whom It May Concern: We appeal to you as representatives 
     of the human rights community in Israel regarding House 
     Resolution 867.
       From day one, the Israeli human rights community has 
     consistently called for Israel to conduct an independent and 
     impartial investigation into the conduct of its forces during 
     ``Operation Cast Lead'' in the Gaza Strip. Today, this call 
     is increasingly echoed by Israelis across the political 
     spectrum. Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor (Likud), Minister 
     of Improvement of Government Services Michael Eitan (Likud), 
     Minority Affairs Minister Avishay Braverman (Labor), and 
     National Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau (Yisrael 
     Beiteinu) have all called for such an inquiry, as has Aryeh 
     Deri, former leader of the Shas party. The US State 
     Department has called for such an inquiry as has National 
     Security Advisor James Jones.
       Such an investigation, provided it meets international 
     standards for scope and independence, would put an end to the 
     polarizing international debate around the Goldstone Report 
     and show that Israel is a law-abiding state that can ensure 
     accountability at home.
       However, we are concerned that H. Res. 867 may derail the 
     momentum towards an Israeli investigation. Resolution 867 
     contains factual inaccuracies, both about the Goldstone 
     Report and about the measures taken by Israel to date, that 
     must not guide choices by policy makers.
       We urge interested parties and Members of the House to show 
     their support for the internal democratic conversation taking 
     place in Israel and to call on Israel to demonstrate that it 
     can ensure genuine accountability at home.
           Sincerely,
       B'Tselem.
       Gisha.
       Hamoked--Center for the Defence of the Individual.
       Public Committee Against Torture in Israel.
       Rabbis for Human Rights.
       Yesh Din--Volunteers for Human Rights.

  I would also like to enter into the Record the Goldstone Report 
itself. This voluminous document, 574 pages, which I hope Members will 
take the opportunity to read.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ELLISON. I can't yield with the short time I have.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. You asked unanimous consent to put the Goldstone 
Report in the Congressional Record, I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. ELLISON. The point is I have already received unanimous consent 
and do intend to enter the document into the Record. But what I ask 
for, from all sides, it is clear that everybody in this body is very 
concerned about peace in the Middle East. We all have to assume best 
intentions from everyone, and we have to look to this issue with a mind 
toward helping Israel and the Palestinians to come to a lasting peace. 
Two states, two people, in security, side by side.
  I don't think this resolution helps us achieve that. So I will be 
voting ``no,'' and I urge my colleagues to do likewise.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. If my colleague would yield, I would like to know 
how much it will cost the taxpayers to put 575 pages of the Goldstone 
Report in the Congressional Record.


                        Parliamentary Inquiries

  Mr. BAIRD. Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. BAIRD. Is it not the conditions under which this is considered 
that Members would have an opportunity to introduce extraneous material 
without having to ask unanimous consent at the moment of request? We 
already have that, I believe. In other words, the gentlelady's 
objection is irrelevant.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. General leave has been obtained.
  Mr. BAIRD. Meaning what, if I may ask. My belief is we had unanimous 
consent at the outset.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman have a further 
parliamentary inquiry?
  Mr. BAIRD. I have a further parliamentary inquiry. With respect to 
the Parliamentarian, ``general leave may be obtained'' is cryptic, and 
I would like a straight answer. My belief is that the conditions of 
this, at the outset of this debate, Members were given the authority to 
introduce extraneous material, and without having to request unanimous 
consent. In other words, the gentlelady's objection is irrelevant.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. General leave has been obtained, but each 
submission of extraneous material is subject to certain page limits.
  Mr. BERMAN. Parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California may state his 
parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. BERMAN. Is it not correct that I sought and received unanimous 
consent for extraneous material to be introduced into the Record 
related to this resolution?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. BERMAN. Further parliamentary inquiry. Is it not correct that 
with the exception of items introduced of more than a certain page, 
wherein the cost has been to be established and leave sought, that 
large items can also be put into the Record as part of that unanimous 
consent request?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. General leave is subject to certain page 
limits for extraneous material.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will state her inquiry.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Is it correct that after a certain number of pages, 
there will be a cost estimate for the printing in the Congressional 
Record? This report is 575 pages, and I am wondering the cost to the 
taxpayers for the printing of this biased report.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. General leave is subject to certain page 
limits. Extraneous material in excess of those limits may be further 
assessed on cost.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I just want to be clear, when you asked under 
general leave for unanimous consent, that I will object to that for the 
printing in the Record.
  Mr. BAIRD. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
  Mr. BAIRD. Is it my understanding that the gentleman from Minnesota 
lost time because of the parliamentary inquiry?

[[Page 26566]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. No, the time of the gentleman from Minnesota 
had expired.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BERMAN. The question is raised by several of the opposing 
speakers: Why are we doing this now? What's the rush? And the only 
rush, because I would prefer we have more time, I prefer we have more 
discussion, is that tomorrow the General Assembly, in its rush to adopt 
a resolution to send this matter to the Security Council and to the 
international criminal courts if there is not an investigation within 
90 days, is speeding to a judgment, and I personally think it is very 
important for us to act on this matter before the General Assembly 
meets, debates, and votes.
  Secondly, there have been glowing tributes, and I am sure they are 
deserved, to the record, the resume, the judgment, the reputation of 
Justice Goldstone. Several of my favorite Supreme Court justices voted 
in a decision called Korematsu to pick up Japanese Americans who 
resided in different parts of the United States and put them into 
detention camps. They are still my favorite justices, but they made a 
mistake. A wonderful jurist can issue a flawed report, and I would 
suggest this is such a situation.
  Next, let's talk about the Human Rights Commission. The U.N. Human 
Rights Council is obsessed with Israel. They have had 24 negative 
resolutions on Israel in its 3 years of existence, which totals more 
than every other resolution on any other country regardless of their 
human rights record. Total, 24 on Israel; less on all of the other 
countries of the world. It is the only country which is on the 
permanent agenda of the Human Rights Council, and it is discussed every 
year automatically. The only country.
  Now, we corrected what I think were some inaccuracies in the initial 
language regarding the mandate, and we recognize the efforts. Never, as 
my ranking member points, to formally change the mandate, but for 
Justice Goldstone to operate. But I would not rest my opposition, my 
support for this resolution, and my disagreement with the opponents 
simply based on the reputation and conduct of the Human Rights Council. 
The fact is I too believe the report is flawed.
  I am going to take a couple of moments to quote from this coming 
week's New Republic an article by Moshe Halbertal. I want to quote two 
paragraphs which I think reflect better than I can say on my own the 
problem here and ask my colleagues to come to grips with this.
  He writes, ``The commission that wrote the report,'' that is the 
Goldstone Report, ``could have performed a great service if it had 
concentrated on gathering the testimonies from Gaza and assessing them 
critically, while acknowledging (as the Goldstone Report failed to do) 
that they are partial and incomplete.''
  By definition, they did not talk, for reasons that we all know, they 
did not talk to the Israeli forces that were involved in the crimes 
this commission found them to have committed.
  ``This would have forced Israel to investigate various matters, 
provide answers, and take appropriate measures.''
  Continuing, ``But instead, the commission opted to add to its 
findings three unnecessary elements: the context of the history that 
led to the war; its assessments of Israel's strategic goals; and long 
sections on Israel's occupation of the West Bank. Why should a 
committee with a mandate to inquire into the operation in Gaza deal 
with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at large?
  ``The honest reader of these sections,'' and I have read those 
sections, ``cannot avoid the impression that their objective is to 
prepare a general indictment of Israel as a predatory state that is 
geared toward violating human rights all the time. It will naturally 
follow from such a premise that the Gaza operation was yet another 
instance of Israel's general wicked behavior. These long sections are 
the weakest, the most biased, and the most outrageous in this long 
document. They are nothing if not political. In Goldstone's account of 
the history that led to the war, for example, Hamas is basically 
described as a legitimate party that had the bad luck to clash with 
Israel. The bloody history of the movement--which, since the beginning 
of the Oslo accords, was determined to do everything in its power, 
including the massacre of civilians, to defeat the peace process--is 
not mentioned.''
  We are in a very strange situation. Israel has conducted numerous 
investigations on this issue. I would like to see Israel conduct a 
formal inquiry on this particular issue. But until we in this Congress 
come here and recommend that some outside commission recognize the U.S. 
military because a number of civilians died in the asymmetrical war or 
when we dealt with Taliban forces in Afghanistan, or other issues that 
come in an asymmetrical war where the soldiers wear no uniforms and 
there is no front, don't start telling us that democratic allies like 
Israel have to have these investigations. Their process will produce 
the right result, I truly believe.
  I urge an ``aye'' vote for the resolution.
  Mrs. BACHMANN. Madam Speaker, the United States and Israel have 
shared a close relationship of friendship, cooperation, and strategic 
alliance that serves as an example to the rest of the world. I believe 
it is imperative for the United States to unequivocally reject the 
findings of the Goldstone Report, in order to preserve and nurture this 
relationship.
  The U.N. Human Rights Council has long been recognized for its anti-
Israel bias, so it comes as little surprise they would rubber-stamp the 
``Goldstone Report'' and its findings of ``crimes against humanity'' 
with regard to Israel's activities in Gaza. To quote Israel's 
Ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, ``Israel basically was the 
equivalent of being summoned to a court in which its guilt was already 
presumed . . . I can't think of any country in the world which would 
participate in such a farce of justice.''
  Indeed, while this report condemns Israel's actions, it ignores the 
precipitating causes of Israel's self-defensive actions, concluding 
that Israel's military operations were ``deliberate and systematic,'' 
and directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, failing to acknowledge 
Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, namely the thousands 
of rockets launched daily at its citizens. Moreover, the Goldstone 
Report ignores the extraordinary steps taken by Israel to minimize 
civilian casualties, often putting its own soldiers at greater risk to 
do so.
  Madam Speaker, it is unfortunate that recent years have been marked 
by escalating armed conflict between Israel and Hamas; however, I 
believe the United States should stand steadfast in its commitment to a 
free and secure Israel as the Middle East comes to embrace the 
liberties and freedoms of democratic societies.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding H. Res. 867 
condemning the United Nation's Goldstone Report on last winter's 
conflict in Israel and the Gaza Strip, which the House of 
Representatives considered today. I am unable to attend today's 
legislative session, but had I been present I would have voted ``aye.''
  The right of our close friend and ally Israel to defend itself from 
rocket fire originating in the Gaza Strip is without question. Since 
2000, over 9,000 rockets have fallen on the residents of southern 
Israel, who live in constant fear of this violent terrorism. Since 
Hamas took over the leadership in Gaza, the number of rockets fired has 
increased considerably, and the range of these rockets is ever 
expanding.
  The situation in the Gaza Strip remains unsustainable. The ongoing 
blockade and the damage to the territory inflicted during the recent 
conflict have caused great hardship to many innocent Palestinian's 
living in Gaza. This situation is only made worse by Hamas, who embed 
themselves in private homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, and use 
innocent Palestinians as human shields during the conflict.
  Judge Richard Goldstone has previously investigated war crimes in the 
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. His report on the Gaza war contains many 
accusations of troubling actions taken by both sides during the recent 
conflict. I have extreme reservations regarding the history of the 
United Nations Human Rights Council and it is troubling that their 
original mandate focused solely in Israel and ignored Hamas' clear 
violations of international law. I applaud Judge Goldstone for his 
insistence on changing that mandate to include investigations of both 
sides, however the pattern

[[Page 26567]]

of bias exhibited by the UNHRC is troubling and difficult to ignore. 
Therefore, I would not support any further action by the United Nations 
that unfairly singles out Israel, and would urge the administration to 
work to actively defeat any such attempts.
  I believe many of the allegations in the report are serious, and the 
most appropriate course of action to take would be for the Israelis and 
Palestinians to each commission independent investigations into their 
countries respective conduct during the war. The war in Gaza last 
winter brought terrible suffering to both the Israelis in southern 
Israel and Palestinians in Gaza and this cannot be ignored.
  The recent conflict makes it clearer than ever that the endless cycle 
of violence has done nothing to bring peace or security to the region. 
I applaud the Obama administration for their commitment to a two state 
solution that represents the best chance for a lasting peace between 
the Israelis and Palestinians. I urge both sides to start negotiations 
as soon as possible.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my concern over 
the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza 
Conflict and in support of H. Res. 867.
  On October 16, 2009, the United Nations Human Rights Council endorsed 
the findings of the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission 
on the Gaza Conflict, commonly referred to as the Goldstone Report. The 
Goldstone report unfairly documents the events that occurred during 
Operation Cast Lead, or the Gaza conflict, from December 27, 2008, to 
January 18, 2009, determining that Israel deliberately attacked Gaza 
civilians.
  As a member of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, I am deeply 
committed to ending human rights violations and holding the 
perpetrators accountable for their actions. However, I join my 
colleagues and over 15 member states of the United Nations Human Rights 
Council, who believe that this report is biased and deeply flawed.
  As a cosponsor of H. Res. 867, I agree that the Obama administration 
should not endorse the Goldstone Report because it unfairly castigates 
Israel's actions during the Gaza conflict. For example, the report 
recommends that the U.N. General Assembly establish a reparation fund 
to compensate Palestinians who have suffered loss during the Gaza 
conflict. However, the report ignores any need that a similar escrow 
fund be established for Israelis who have suffered years of violence 
and destruction at the hands of Hamas and other militant groups in 
Gaza.
  Finally, the report fails to recognize the repeated violent attacks 
committed against Israeli citizens and its unequivocal right to defend 
itself. Israel has the right and the responsibility to defend its 
people and ensure its security. That right should be fully 
acknowledged.
  Madam Speaker, there is an urgency to reach a workable peace between 
Israel and Palestine. It is my hope that these two nations are able to 
find a lasting peace in the near term to circumvent further violent 
conflicts, and I believe this report does not move us closer to that 
goal. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the Goldstone Report 
and supporting H. Res. 867.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 867. This 
resolution, though nonbinding, sends a signal to the world that the 
United States Congress is not serious about pushing the Israelis and 
the Palestinians toward a peaceful resolution.
  It is true that the body that mandated the Report of the United 
Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, known as the 
Goldstone Report, has been no friend to Israel. Indeed, the United 
Nations Human Rights Council has consistently passed one-sided biased 
resolutions against Israel while, at the same time, allowing 
documented, blatant human rights violators to preside over that body 
without criticism. The U.S and other friends of Israel have every right 
and every reason to be critical of the United Nations' treatment of 
Israel, when, for example, 6 of 10 special sessions of the U.N. General 
Assembly have been about Israel, while none has been called on Tibet or 
Darfur.
  Therefore, we must ask ourselves, does this resolution, which opposes 
further consideration of the Goldstone Report, bring us closer to peace 
in the Middle East? Does it spur negotiations between the Israelis, 
Palestinians, and other parties, or does it marginalize and itself 
choose sides? We must ask, are we undermining President Obama's, 
Secretary Clinton's, and Special Envoy Mitchell's efforts to serve as 
an honest broker, bring the two sides together, and achieve peace, by 
passing this resolution?
  Madam Speaker, Israel, unequivocally, has a right to defend itself 
against those who seek to destroy it. We know that Israel was 
relentlessly attacked by rockets and mortars leading up to the Gaza 
war. They made the calculation that they could not allow Hamas to 
continue this violence and abuse.
  However, neither Israel nor Hamas, nor any other country or other 
nonstate political actor is exempt from international human rights laws 
or free of consequence for violations of them. If nothing else, the 
Goldstone Report should serve as a document that Israel, Hamas, and the 
rest of the international community can use to ensure that future human 
rights violations do not take place in civilian areas and that their 
militaries and fighters are actively working toward minimizing civilian 
casualties in the future.
  Madam Speaker, time and again we acknowledge the urgency of this 
conflict. The Obama administration is working feverishly with both 
sides toward a peaceful resolution, a two-state solution which will 
benefit both parties, the United States and the Middle East region as a 
whole.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``no'' on this resolution.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, regrettably, I rise 
in opposition to H. Res. 867, a resolution condemning the recently 
issued ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza 
Conflict,'' commonly known as the Goldstone Report.
  I do not believe that the House should be asked to vote on this 
resolution when it has not come before the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
for even one hearing and was brought to the House with little notice 
under procedures typically reserved for noncontroversial legislation. 
Given the subject matter of this resolution and the diverse range of 
views expressed on it from many organizations and individuals, 
including individuals in my own congressional district, I do not 
believe this resolution can be described as noncontroversial.
  The military conflict in the Gaza Strip last winter resulted in 
devastating consequences to innocent Israeli and Palestinian civilians. 
It is critical that the international community evaluate the events of 
last December and January in a factual, unbiased manner. To this end, I 
am pleased that H. Res. 867 recognizes the numerous problems in the 
original resolution passed by the United Nations Human Rights Council 
authorizing the Goldstone Report, as that original resolution wrongly 
singled out alleged Israeli abuses and ignored the harm caused by 
Hamas' rocket and mortar attacks on the Israeli people.
  However, I have serious reservations about other aspects of H. Res. 
867.
  No congressional hearings have been held on H. Res. 867 or the 
Goldstone Report. On an issue of such importance, Congress must do its 
due diligence and ensure that we have a full understanding of the facts 
before being asked to vote to condemn the report and its authors.
  Furthermore, I am concerned that H. Res. 867 implicitly criticizes 
the Goldstone Report because of the initial Human Rights Council 
resolution. Justice Richard Goldstone, who oversaw the Goldstone 
Report, is a distinguished jurist with a long record of support for 
human rights. Most notably, Justice Goldstone was a prominent critic of 
the abhorrent apartheid regime in South Africa. As H. Res. 867 notes, 
to his credit, Justice Goldstone extended the original mandate for the 
Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict 
to include an evaluation of Hamas' rocket attacks on civilians in 
southern Israel, among other issues.
  Regardless of one's ultimate evaluation of the report, it is 
important to recognize the changes that Justice Goldstone was able to 
make to it and evaluate his report on its own merits.
  I fully support efforts to provide clarity, honesty and accuracy to 
the debate about the conflict in Gaza, just as do many of my 
constituents who have contacted me this week urging me to oppose this 
resolution. Hastily voting on a resolution to condemn this report 
without the ability to properly evaluate its findings does not serve 
this purpose.
  Also, I do not believe that this resolution aids the important effort 
of achieving a two-state solution to help end the ever-present violence 
and strife in the region. President Obama has taken admirable steps to 
bring the two sides to the negotiating table, after years of neglect 
under the Bush administration. Yet, this resolution today does not aid 
the administration in that effort or further the peace process. In 
fact, I believe this resolution undermines the ability of the United 
States to further push both sides toward serious peace negotiations.
  The House can play a constructive role in promoting peace and 
understanding in the Middle East and I look forward to supporting such 
efforts. Regrettably, due to the concerns I have stated above about 
specific aspects of this resolution and the process under which it

[[Page 26568]]

has been brought to the House, I must oppose the resolution.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, it is with great disappointment that I 
rise today to address H. Res. 867, a resolution calling on the 
President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any 
endorsement or further consideration of the ``Report of the United 
Nations Fact Finding Mission.''
  Like many of my colleagues, I support the rights of countries--
including Israel--to defend themselves. When a democratically elected 
and peace-seeking nation is forced to take up arms, it is within its 
rights and obligations to protect its own land and people.
  Sadly, the resolution we consider today goes far beyond that 
principle. H. Res. 867 will only serve to drive a wedge between the 
parties and will derail the Administration's efforts towards a peaceful 
resolution to the ongoing conflict.
  While the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 
Gaza Conflict'' is far from perfect, it should not be used as a 
political tool to block the peace process or to promote distrust and 
division.
  Any action Congress takes should serve to promote a negotiated peace 
that will end the violence that threatens to overtake the region and 
irreparably scar generations. I fear that the resolution before us 
today only fans the flames of discord and moves us no closer to the 
common goal of security and prosperity.
  It is my hope that in the future Congress will have the opportunity 
to consider legislation that is balanced and that--at its core--
promotes a smart security policy for the U.S. and its allies in the 
region. Unfortunately, this resolution does not.
  Mr. PAULSEN. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support for the 
resolution before us calling for the unequivocal opposition to any 
endorsement or further consideration of the Report of the United 
Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.
  This report, more commonly known as ``the Goldstone Report'' 
continues the U.N.'s misguided treatment towards Israel.
  Madam Speaker, this report and its findings have been skewed from the 
start. Former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary 
Robinson, condemned the mandate to initiate the report as being one-
sided and ``guided not by human rights, but by politics.''
  Therefore, the results are not surprising. The report gives a one-
sided account of the conflict and does nothing to promote or bring 
about stability in the region.
  While seeking to condemn Israel with outrageous accusations, nowhere 
in the misguided report does it recognize the fact that Israel has a 
right to defend itself from violent terrorist attacks.
  Adopting this resolution will go a long way in sending a message to 
the U.N. that the American people will not stand for this biased and 
misleading action.
  I want to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen for 
their thoughtful work on this resolution. I urge my colleagues to vote 
``yes'' and move towards real, meaningful peace in the Middle East.
  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support 
for H. Res. 867, a resolution calling on the President and the 
Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further 
consideration of the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 
Mission on the Gaza Conflict in Multilateral Fora.''
  Madam Speaker, this past August, I had the opportunity to visit 
Israel with my husband Brian. There, I saw firsthand how real the 
struggle for survival really is. I realized that when surrounded by 
enemies and people who think nothing of suicide bombing innocent 
civilians and launching hundreds of rockets across the borders, self-
defense becomes paramount. Action becomes necessary when diplomacy and 
words fail. And, despite decades of attempts to engage its enemies, 
action continues to be necessary to protect this small, but strong 
nation.
  The Goldstone Report is just another attempt by Israel's enemies to 
delegitimize it--this time using the pretense of a ``United Nations 
fact finding mandate.''
  Biased from the start--mandating the fact finding mission to 
``investigate all violations of international human rights law and 
International Humanitarian Law by . . . Israel, against the Palestinian 
people,'' the mission intentionally ignored the use of human shields by 
Hamas and the indirect support of Syria and Iran.
  American courts have long recognized the right to act in self-
defense. Only a biased United Nations report could find the Palestinian 
attackers morally equivalent to the Israeli defenders.
  When I left Israel in August, I pledged to work tirelessly on behalf 
of the Israeli people to ensure their survival. I am glad to speak out 
against this overtly biased report and I urge my colleagues to join me 
fighting for the Israeli people.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, this resolution before us today, House 
Resolution 867, does nothing to advance the cause of peace and 
understanding between the Israelis and Palestinians.
  In a recent meeting with Jewish constituents, I heard a comment that 
I thought was moving for its simplicity and power. My constituent told 
me, ``Israel will not have peace and security until Palestinians have 
hope.''
  This resolution does nothing to give hope to the people of Palestine 
that a better, peaceful future is possible and therefore does nothing 
to give greater security to the people of Israel. It is a hasty and 
unconstructive measure that fails to establish a foundation upon which 
a future peace and prosperity will be constructed.
  House Resolution 867 has too many flaws and questionable conclusions 
for me to support it. I think the Committee should have given the 
Goldstone report a hearing and taken the opportunity to ask Justice 
Goldstone questions about his mandate, his findings and his 
conclusions.
  I would ask that Justice Goldstone's letter to Chairman Berman and 
Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen be included in the Record.
  In this letter, Justice Goldstone clarifies that he demanded and 
received an expanded mandate to include the attacks on Israel. The 
report includes more than 150 instances where it explores the rocket 
attacks against Israel. And as a matter of fact, the Goldstone report 
found that rocket attacks constituted ``indiscriminate attacks upon the 
civilian population of southern Israel''.
  I recognize a history of bias against Israel at the United Nations 
and I believe that one-sided resolutions against Israel have no place 
in an honest debate. However, it should be noted--and it is not in the 
resolution before us today--that Justice Goldstone dedicated scores of 
pages to expose war crimes and human rights violations perpetrated by 
Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups for the first time ever.
  This resolution suffers too many instances of inaccuracy. It too 
often gives an account of the Goldstone report that is incomplete and 
therefore ends up being misleading. I don't believe this moves us 
closer to peace and for these reasons I cannot support the resolution.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Madam Speaker, I strongly support the resolution and 
want to express my deep appreciation to the Chairman, Mr. Berman, and 
to the Ranking Minority Member, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, for their efforts to 
bring this resolution before the House.
  In April 2009, the U.N. Human Rights Council set up a Commission to 
condemn Israel. To the surprise of no one, it did exactly that. But for 
the grave subject matter, the Goldstone report, built heavily on 
testimony provided under the auspices of Hamas, would be laughable. In 
the self-righteous fantasyland inhabited by Judge Goldstone and his 
colleagues, there's no such thing as terrorism; there's no such thing 
as Hamas (and if it does exist, it's certainly nothing to fear); 
there's no such thing as legitimate self-defense; and war is like a 
sporting event, rather than the most ghastly, destructive, chaotic 
phenomenon we human beings are capable of creating.
  Had the report been submitted by a group of eager law students or the 
human rights club on a college campus, I would suggest that their 
efforts had been unfortunately wasted on the production of a pompous, 
tendentious, one-sided political diatribe. Notwithstanding all their 
alleged ``facts'' there's very little truth, and for all the so-called 
``context'' they supply, there's very little wisdom.
  As this diatribe actually carries the imprimatur of a part of the 
United Nations, there have been--as I feared when the report was first 
issued--a number of very unfortunate developments all based on the 
report is being mistaken for a credible piece of work, which it is not. 
In addition to the wasteful consideration of this thoroughly biased and 
fatally flawed document in several bodies of the United Nations, the 
report has also set off yet another round of offensive and sterile 
Israel-bashing that has brought peace no closer, that has produced no 
international consensus, and, along the way, that has further sullied 
and cheapened the reputation of the United Nations and the cause of 
human rights.
  Certainly, the United States must do all that it can to ensure that 
no more time is spent on this distraction from the real work of making 
peace. The Obama Administration has rightfully denounced the Goldstone 
Report, which, if it was taken seriously, would make it legally 
impossible for this country, or any other country, to defend themselves 
from terrorists who hide behind civilians. Israeli Prime Minister 
Netanyahu has been forcefully arguing that

[[Page 26569]]

international community can't possibly expect Israel to exchange ``land 
for peace'' if, when the peace breaks down, Israel is effectively 
prohibited from defending itself.
  First of all, I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is completely right. 
And second, there's not even the smallest shred of a possibility that 
the Israeli public would agree to any peace agreement under the absurd 
operational restrictions that the Goldstone Report proposes to require 
of Israel's (and every other country's) armed forces.
  The resolution makes clear the strong view of the House that the 
Obama Administration must do everything it can to quash the Goldstone 
report, both to protect our own right of self-defense, and to make 
clear to the world that they can have Goldstone, or they can have 
Middle East peace, but they can't have Goldstone and Middle East peace.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 
867, a bipartisan resolution which calls upon the President and the 
Secretary of State to oppose the endorsement and further consideration 
of the ``Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza 
Conflict'' in multilateral fora.
  The report, commissioned by the United Nations Human Rights Council, 
called for an investigation into war crimes and possible crimes against 
humanity by Israel during 22 days of fighting in Gaza and southern 
Israel in December 2008 and January 2009.
  As a result, the fact-finding mission released an unbalanced 575-page 
report which unfairly focuses on Israel's conduct despite efforts by 
the report's chief author, Justice Richard Goldstone, to broaden the 
mandate to include violations committed by Hamas and other militant 
groups.
  In spite of its inaccuracies, the United Nations Human Rights Council 
endorsed the report and its recommendations and referred it to the 
United Nations Security Council, United Nations General Assembly and 
the International Criminal Court for further action.
  A report that is not inclusive of all the facts and circumstances 
surrounding the conflict is an inconclusive report. It is unacceptable 
to consider a report which fails to provide a complete and accurate 
account of the Gaza conflict. To do otherwise undermines the inquiry 
process and denies the truth.
  I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 867.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of H. Res. 867, which calls on the President and the Secretary 
of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further 
consideration of the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission 
on the Gaza Conflict, commonly referred to as the Goldstone Report.
  President of the Human Rights Council established the United Nations 
Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict with the mandate ``to 
investigate all violations of international human rights law and 
international humanitarian law that might have been committed during 
military operations that were conducted in the Gaza Strip.''
  The report accused Israel of ``war crimes'' and ``crimes against 
humanity'', while downplaying evidence of Hamas' real war crimes and 
largely dismissing Israel's extraordinary efforts to minimize civilian 
casualties.
  In a turbulent part of the world, we can count on the friendship of 
Israel because we share the important values of freedom of religion, 
speech and thought--values that aren't universally shared across the 
Middle East.
  And yet when Israel responds to defend itself, it is singled out 
unfairly at the United Nations and elsewhere for special condemnation 
and criticism. It is our responsibility, as a friend and ally to 
Israel, to stand up for their rights and denounce those that 
unreasonably target Israel for reproach. While Israel is not perfect, 
we must be ever watchful and steadfast because there is an unfortunate 
double standard.
  Israel showed extraordinary restraint in response to terrorism and 
daily rocket attacks emanating from fanatical Hamas militants in the 
Gaza Strip, and yet until Israel responded militarily, the UN and the 
world looked away. I can think of no country in the world that would 
have shown such restraint in the face of direct attacks on their 
civilians.
  Hamas launched 7,000 rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli cities 
between the pullout from Gaza in 2005 and 2009--Hamas' military 
doctrine makes no distinction between non-combatants and military 
targets.
  During the ground fighting in Gaza, Hamas used mosques, schools and 
hospitals as military sites and employed civilians as human shields--
clear violations of the law of war.
  Unintentional civilian deaths Israel caused during the Gaza conflict 
are condemned as war crimes; the intentional Hamas attacks on Israeli 
civilians are swept under the rug.
  There can be no moral equivalency made between Hamas and Israel, and 
this report's biased conclusion makes it clear, once again, that the 
United Nations Human Rights Council is a farce.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 867, a 
resolution standing against further action on the ``Report of the 
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict,'' also known 
as the ``Goldstone Report.''
  From its inception, the Gaza report was rooted in an orchestrated 
campaign to delegitimize Israel. It was commissioned by the U.N. Human 
Rights Council, an institution obsessed with condemning Israel. In his 
response to the Goldstone Report, Michael Posner, the Assistant 
Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, noted that the UNHRC 
has ordered more reports and held more special sessions on Israel than 
another country in the world. The Council has also passed more 
resolutions against Israel than for all 191 other U.N. members combined 
and Israel is the only country that is a permanent agenda item at 
Council meetings.
  Those who seek to elevate the Goldstone Report recommendations are 
advancing a campaign to demonize Israel's soldiers, denounce its 
democratic institutions, and undermine efforts to move the peace 
process forward. They feed into a disturbing new wave of anti-Israel 
discrimination including Arab League efforts to invigorate the Arab 
boycott against Israel and a recent Bahraini parliament vote to make it 
illegal for the Kingdom's citizens to have contact with Israelis.
  Some opponents of this resolution have suggested that its motivation 
is to bury the incidents and allegations recorded in the report. This 
assessment is grossly wrong. Israel is already investigating and 
prosecuting reported incidents in Gaza and the United States has 
encouraged the goverment to expand and intensify its efforts. The 
integrity of the Israeli military and the Israeli judicial system 
requires that all credible allegations are thoroughly examined.
  What is buried by the Goldstone Report is the suffering Palestinians 
in Gaza experience every day as hostages to an extremist terror 
campaign fought by Hamas and fueled by Iran. What is largely ignored is 
the deliberate efforts of Hamas to launch attacks from civilian areas 
and the extraordinary efforts Israel took to avoid civilian casualties.
  Others have suggested that Israel's cooperation with the ``fact 
finding mission'' could have avoided its biased outcome. The reality is 
that the mission was fated by a sweeping mandate, the inclusion of a 
judge with admitted prejudice against Israel, and reliance on testimony 
by individuals largely chosen and at times intimidated by Hamas 
officials.
  As a result, the report calls for the International Criminal Court to 
consider charges against Israeli military leaders and politicians and 
supports universal jurisdiction for countries to bring charges against 
Israeli soldiers and diplomats wherever they travel. Yet, Hamas leaders 
and the terrorist state sponsors who sparked the Gaza conflict with 
thousands of rockets face no sanction at all.
  While President Obama works to achieve a breakthrough in the peace 
process, continued action on the Goldstone Report only pushes the 
parties farther apart. As Israel begins to implement unprecedented 
policies to constrain future settlement growth, the virulent atmosphere 
generated by the Goldstone Report can only serve to poison hope for 
progress.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for H. Res. 867. I commend the 
Obama administration for its continued work to oppose any endorsement 
or further consideration of the report and its recommendations.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 867, a 
resolution that calls on the Secretary of State and the President to 
unequivocally oppose further consideration of the Goldstone Report in 
international arenas. This resolution sends a clear message to the 
international community: the Goldstone report does nothing to advance 
peace and security in the Middle East. Rather, it serves to reinforce 
the deep mistrust that pervades the region and excuses the actions of 
terrorist groups and their state sponsors.
  The Goldstone report ignores the facts. The terrorist threat 
surrounding Israel's defensive operations in Gaza required a decisive 
response, and any sovereign nation would have--and should have--done 
what Israel did. In fact, Richard Goldstone himself said, ``If this was 
a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.''
  The Goldstone report disregards what it means to fight against 
terrorists who use human shields and have no regard for human life. The 
findings and conclusion of the report have ominous consequences for the 
United States and other countries who seek to prevent terrorist threats 
from taking root around

[[Page 26570]]

the world. We cannot allow the Goldstone report to set a precedent--the 
stakes are too high.
  This report was not guided by a commitment to human rights, but 
rather motivated by a bias against Israel. Now is the time for the 
United Nations to immediately turn its attention to the very real human 
rights violators around the world. Human rights victims are pleading 
for the world's attention. I would urge U.N. member states to devote 
time and thought to the realities of human rights around the world--not 
Israel. Israel, with strong democratic and judicial institutions, can 
make any necessary determinations about how to move forward from here.
  I would like to thank Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen 
for their leadership in authoring this resolution and bringing it to 
the floor. This is a true example of the importance of bipartisanship 
because the U.S.-Israel relationship is stronger when we work across 
party lines.
  I would urge my colleagues to support the resolution.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I am proud to be a cosponsor of 
this essential Resolution, unequivocally opposing any endorsement or 
further consideration of the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 
Mission on the Gaza Conflict.
  The United Nations report on the conflict in Gaza is reflective of 
the original mandate ordering its creation: biased and one-sided. Like 
all sovereign nations, Israel has not only a right, but moreover, an 
obligation, to ensure the safety and security of her citizens. Israel's 
military operation was in response to 8 years during which Hamas 
terrorists fired more than 10,000 rockets, mortars and missiles at 
Israeli towns and villages.
  Despite these facts, and due to the original mandate that precluded 
it from drafting an objective report, the Commission concluded that 
Israel's defensive operation was a war on Gaza's civilian population. 
This claim is an outright distortion of the truth.
  Throughout the Gaza Conflict, Israel went above and beyond--even 
putting itself at risk--to protect innocent Palestinian civilians. 
Specifically, Israel dropped leaflets and made phone calls to targeted 
Palestinian areas to warn citizens they were in danger, even if that 
meant losing the element of surprise and putting the lives of its own 
soldiers at risk.
  This report ignores evidence that many civilian casualties were a 
result of Hamas routinely using Palestinian civilians as human shields. 
Eyewitness testimonies, video and Israeli intelligence reports show 
that during the operation, Hamas stored weapons in mosques, used 
hospitals as headquarters, and intentionally endangered Palestinian 
civilians.
  As a member of the Congressional Taskforce on Israel at the United 
Nations, it troubles me to see yet another biased, unfair attack 
against the State of Israel. Not only is this report a disgrace to the 
mission of the United Nations, but it distracts us from the real issue 
at hand--achieving lasting peace in the Middle East. Israelis, 
Palestinians and the international community must not lose the focus of 
this important goal, and must continue working to fight terrorism and 
support peace.
  Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that we have 
gotten to the point that the House even has to consider this resolution 
before us this week. I am inclined to vote for this resolution but not 
without reservations.
  My vote for this resolution should not be read either as an 
endorsement of Operation Lead Cast or as an endorsement of the position 
that investigations of serious allegations of war crimes should not be 
undertaken.
  We cannot act as if the devastating war in Gaza in January did not 
have consequences for Palestinians, Israelis, and the international 
community. We cannot and should not brush aside legitimate allegations 
about abuses committed by both sides during this conflict. Yet, now 
more than ever, we also need to intensify efforts to resolve the very 
serious issues that had unfortunately led to many needless deaths and 
continuing tensions and may continue to do so if we let the status quo 
linger.
  I have reservations that the resolution before the House this week 
would do nothing to defuse the demagoguery that has long plagued the 
Middle East and to help steer us to a future devoid of more rocket 
attacks or violence in the region.
  Ten months after the ``cessation'' of overt fighting in Gaza, 
tensions remain high and both the Palestinian and Israeli people 
continue to live with tremendous insecurity and fear. I am dismayed 
that it appears to be only a matter of time until the endless cycle of 
violence repeats itself again along with the resumption of increased 
misery for innocent Israeli and Palestinian men, women, and children in 
the region. We as a Congress, at this point, would be better served by 
trying to support efforts to reinvigorate the peace process, defuse 
these mounting tensions, and pressing both parties to meet at the 
negotiating table.
  Nonetheless, the Goldstone report includes some very serious charges 
relating to possible war crimes or other crimes against humanity 
committed by Israel, Hamas, and other Palestinian armed groups. To give 
just one example, there are allegations of deliberate and premeditative 
efforts to target a wastewater treatment plant--that did not have any 
link to ``Palestinian armed groups or any other effective contribution 
to military action''--sending over 200,000 cubic meters of raw sewage 
onto farmland. What is lacking in this report is a full and complete 
accounting of the reckless, indiscriminate, and ongoing use of rockets 
by Hamas and other groups to target innocent civilians in Israel. Such 
a report cannot shortchange such an effort because doing so allows 
those seeking to score political points--rather than seeking peace, 
stability, and accountability--to hijack this process.
  Again, the breadth and gravity of these charges demand that these 
``facts'' be established in a comprehensive and fair way. Yet, even our 
own State Department--which has been actively engaged in pursuing peace 
in the region and urging both sides to move that process forward--has 
raised concerns about both the mandate for the report as well as the 
report itself, noting ``serious concerns about the report's unbalanced 
focus on Israel, its sweeping factual and legal conclusions, and many 
of its recommendations.'' I am not saying that there should not be a 
serious and comprehensive finding of fact that can serve as a starting 
point on the road to truth and justice about what occurred on both 
sides. But this is not it.
  The lack of a widely credible report on potential human rights abuses 
during the Gaza conflict is a missed opportunity to advance peace or 
stability in the region. It does not advance accountability. In a 
region with plenty of easy opportunity for division and unleashing of 
tensions, I believe that a more widely credible report could have been 
so much more useful in promoting transparency about what occurred, 
justice for those affected, and the prospect of a future peace for all. 
And it would have made this resolution on the floor this week 
unnecessary.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I am submitting the following summary of 
the Goldstone Report as part of the debate on H. Res. 867.

 Excerpt From United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict 
                         (The Goldstone Report)


                             B. Methodology

       11. To implement its mandate, the Mission determined that 
     it was required to consider any actions by all parties that 
     might have constituted violations of international human 
     rights law or international humanitarian law. The mandate 
     also required it to review related actions in the entire 
     Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel.
       12. With regard to temporal scope, the Mission decided to 
     focus primarily on events, actions or circumstances occurring 
     since 19 June 2008, when a ceasefire was agreed between the 
     Government of Israel and Hamas. The Mission has also taken 
     into consideration matters occurring after the end of 
     military operations that constitute continuing human rights 
     and international humanitarian law violations related to or 
     as a consequence of the military operations, up to 31 July 
     2009.
       13. The Mission also analysed the historical context of the 
     events that led to the military operations in Gaza between 
     during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009 
     and the links between these operations and overarching 
     Israeli policies vis-a-vis the Occupied Palestinian 
     Territory.
       14. The Mission considered that the reference in its 
     mandate to violations committed ``in the context'' of the 
     December--January military operations required it to include 
     restrictions on human rights and fundamental freedoms 
     relating to Israel's strategies and actions in the context of 
     its military operations.
       15. The normative framework for the Mission has been 
     general international law, the Charter of the United Nations, 
     international humanitarian law, international human rights 
     law and international criminal law.
       16. This report does not purport to be exhaustive in 
     documenting the very high number of relevant incidents that 
     occurred in the period covered by the Mission's mandate. 
     Nevertheless, the Mission considers that the report is 
     illustrative of the main patterns of violations. In Gaza, the 
     Mission investigated 36 incidents.
       17. The Mission based its work on an independent and 
     impartial analysis of compliance by the parties with their 
     obligations under international human rights and humanitarian 
     law in the context of the recent conflict in Gaza, and on 
     international investigative standards developed by the United 
     Nations.

[[Page 26571]]


       18. The Mission adopted an inclusive approach in gathering 
     information and seeking views. Information-gathering methods 
     included: (a) the review of reports from different sources; 
     (b) interviews with victims, witnesses and other persons 
     having relevant information); (c) site visits to specific 
     locations in Gaza where incidents had occurred; (d) the 
     analysis of video and photographic images, including 
     satellite imagery; (e) the review of medical reports about 
     injuries to victims; (f) the forensic analysis of weapons and 
     ammunition remnants collected at incident sites; (g) meetings 
     with a variety of interlocutors; (h) invitations to provide 
     information relating to the Mission's investigation 
     requirements; (i) the wide circulation of a public call for 
     written submissions; (j) public hearings in Gaza and in 
     Geneva.
       19. The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews. It 
     reviewed more than 300 reports, submissions and other 
     documentation either researched of its own motion, received 
     in reply to its call for submissions and notes verbales or 
     provided during meetings or otherwise, amounting to more than 
     10,000 pages, over 30 videos and 1,200 photographs.
       20. By refusing to cooperate with the Mission, the 
     Government of Israel prevented it from meeting Israeli 
     government officials, but also from travelling to Israel to 
     meet with Israeli victims and to the West Bank to meet with 
     Palestinian Authority representatives and Palestinian 
     victims.
       21. The Mission conducted field visits, including 
     investigations of incident sites, in the Gaza Strip. This 
     allowed the Mission to observe first-hand the situation on 
     the ground, and speak to many witnesses and other relevant 
     persons.
       22. The purpose of the public hearings, which were 
     broadcast live, was to enable victims, witnesses and experts 
     from all sides to the conflict to speak directly to as many 
     people as possible in the region as well as in the 
     international community. The Mission gave priority to the 
     participation of victims and people from the affected 
     communities. The 38 public testimonies covered facts as well 
     as legal and military matters. The Mission had initially 
     intended to hold hearings in Gaza, Israel and the West Bank. 
     However, denial of access to Israel and the West Bank 
     resulted in the decision to hold hearings of participants 
     from Israel and the West Bank in Geneva.
       23. In establishing its findings, the Mission sought to 
     rely primarily and whenever possible on information it 
     gathered first-hand. Information produced by others, 
     including reports, affidavits and media reports, was used 
     primarily as corroboration.
       24. The Mission's final conclusions on the reliability of 
     the information received were made taking into consideration 
     the Mission's assessment of the credibility and reliability 
     of the witnesses it met, verifying sources and methodology 
     used in reports and documents produced by others, cross-
     referencing the relevant material and information, and 
     assessing whether, in all the circumstances, there was 
     sufficient information of a credible and reliable nature for 
     the Mission to make a finding in fact.
       25. On this basis, the Mission has, to the best of its 
     ability, determined what facts have been established. In many 
     cases it has found that acts entailing individual criminal 
     responsibility have been committed. In all of these cases the 
     Mission has found that there is sufficient information to 
     establish the objective elements of the crimes in question. 
     In almost all of the cases the Mission has also been able to 
     determine whether or not it appears that the acts in question 
     were done deliberately or recklessly or in the knowledge that 
     the consequence that resulted would result in the ordinary 
     course of events. The Mission has thus referred in many cases 
     to the relevant fault element (mens rea). The Mission fully 
     appreciates the importance of the presumption of innocence: 
     the findings in the report do not subvert the operation of 
     that principle. The findings do not attempt to identify the 
     individuals responsible for the commission of offences nor do 
     they pretend to reach the standard of proof applicable in 
     criminal trials.
       26. In order to provide the parties concerned with an 
     opportunity to submit additional relevant information and 
     express their position and respond to allegations, the 
     Mission also submitted comprehensive lists of questions to 
     the Government of Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the 
     Gaza authorities in advance of completing its analysis and 
     findings. The Mission received replies from the Palestinian 
     Authority and the Gaza authorities but not from Israel


                            Recommendations

     1769. To Israel
       The Mission recommends that Israel immediately cease the 
     border closures and restrictions of passage through border 
     crossings with the Gaza Strip and allow passage of goods 
     necessary and sufficient to meet the needs of the population, 
     for the recovery and reconstruction of housing and essential 
     services and for the resumption of meaningful economic 
     activity in the Gaza Strip.
       The Mission recommends that Israel cease the restrictions 
     on access to the sea for fishing purposes imposed on the Gaza 
     Strip and allow such fishing activities within the 20 
     nautical miles as provided for in the Oslo accords. It 
     further recommends that Israel allow the resumption of 
     agricultural activity within the Gaza Strip, including within 
     areas in the vicinity of the borders with Israel.
       Israel should initiate a review of the rules of engagement, 
     standard operating procedures, open fire regulations and 
     other guidance for military and security personnel. The 
     Mission recommends that Israel avail itself of the expertise 
     of the ICRC, the United Nations Office of the High 
     Commissioner for Human Rights and other relevant bodies, and 
     Israeli experts, civil society organizations with the 
     relevant expertise and specialization, in order to ensure 
     compliance in this respect with international humanitarian 
     law and international human rights law. In particular such 
     rules of engagement should ensure that the principles of 
     proportionality, distinction, precaution and non-
     discrimination are effectively integrated in all such 
     guidance and in any oral briefings provided to officers, 
     soldiers and security forces, so as to avoid the recurrence 
     of Palestinian civilian deaths, destruction and affronts on 
     human dignity in violation of international law.
       The Mission recommends that Israel allow freedom of 
     movement for Palestinians within the OPT--within the West 
     Bank including East Jerusalem, between the Gaza Strip and the 
     West Bank and between the OPT and the outside world--in 
     accordance with international human rights standards and 
     international commitments entered into by Israel and the 
     representatives of the Palestinian people. The Mission 
     further recommends that Israel forthwith lifts travel bans 
     currently placed on Palestinians by reason of their human 
     rights or political activities.
       The Mission recommends that Israel release Palestinians who 
     are detained in Israeli prisons in connection with the 
     occupation. The release of children should be an utmost 
     priority. The Mission further recommends that Israel cease 
     the discriminatory treatment of Palestinian detainees. Family 
     visits for prisoners from Gaza should resume.
       Israel should forthwith cease interference with national 
     political processes in the OPT, and as a first step release 
     all members of the Palestinian Legislative Council currently 
     in detention and allow all members of the PLC to move between 
     Gaza and the West Bank so that the Council may resume 
     functioning.
       The Government of Israel should cease actions aimed at 
     limiting the expression of criticism by civil society and 
     members of the public concerning Israel's policies and 
     conduct during the military operations in the Gaza Strip. The 
     Mission also recommends that Israel set up an independent 
     inquiry to assess whether the treatment by Israeli judicial 
     authorities of Palestinian and Jewish Israelis expressing 
     dissent in connection with the offensive was discriminatory, 
     both in terms of charges and detention pending trial. The 
     results of the inquiry should be made public and, subject to 
     the findings, appropriate remedial action should be taken.
       The Government of Israel should refrain from any action of 
     reprisal against Palestinian and Israeli individuals and 
     organizations that have cooperated with the UN Fact Finding 
     Mission on the Gaza Conflict, in particular individuals who 
     have appeared at the Public Hearings held by the Mission in 
     Gaza and Geneva and expressed criticism of actions by the 
     State of Israel.
       The Mission recommends that Israel reiterates its 
     commitment to respect the inviolability of UN premises and 
     personnel and that it undertakes all appropriate measures to 
     ensure that there is no repetition of violations in the 
     future (ref Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the 
     UN). It further recommends that reparation to the United 
     Nations be provided fully and without further delay by the 
     State of Israel, and that the General Assembly consider this 
     matter.
     I770. To Palestinian armed groups
       The Mission recommends that Palestinian armed groups 
     undertake forthwith to respect international humanitarian 
     law, in particular by renouncing attacks on Israeli civilians 
     and civilian objects, and take all feasible precautionary 
     measures to avoid harm to Palestinian civilians during 
     hostilities.
       The Mission recommends that Palestinian armed groups who 
     hold Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in detention release him on 
     humanitarian grounds. Pending such release they should 
     recognize his status as prisoner of war, treat him as such, 
     and allow him ICRC visits.
     1771. To responsible Palestinian authorities
       The Mission recommends that the Palestinian Authority issue 
     clear instructions to security forces under its command to 
     abide by human rights norms as enshrined in the Palestinian 
     Basic Law and international instruments; ensure prompt and 
     independent investigation of all allegations of serious human 
     rights violations by security forces under its control; and 
     end resort to military justice to deal with cases involving 
     civilians.
       The Mission recommends that the Palestinian Authority and 
     the Gaza authorities release without delay all political 
     detainees currently in their power and refrain from further 
     arrests on political grounds and in violation of 
     international human rights law.
       The Mission recommends that the Palestinian Authority and 
     the Gaza authorities

[[Page 26572]]

     continue to enable the free and independent operation of 
     Palestinian non-governmental organizations, including human 
     rights organizations, and of the Independent Commission on 
     Human Rights.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 867, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________