obama has been compared to a 3-dimensional chess player, thinking multiple moves ahead of his opponents. now he has embarked on playing on the middle-east chess board. can he, better still, will he play on the chess board set up for him by netanyahu or will he bring out his own chess board? look at the chess board presented to him by netanyahu

Anyone who thought that President Obama was backing away from his commitment to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by moving away from the emphasis on a settlement freeze has already been proven wrong

So one speech constitutes "proof" that Obama will continue to make the settlement freeze the centerpiece of his strategy?

The New York Times has a rather different take:

President Obama, who has met immovable resistance from Israel over his demand for a full freeze on settlements in the West Bank, is largely setting that issue aside as a first step toward restarting Middle East peace talks.

Rather, Mr. Obama, unable to extract that concession from Israel or other confidence-building moves from Arab states, seems intent to press Palestinians and Israelis to negotiate all the difficult issues between them toward a final deal that has eluded negotiators, and bedeviled American presidents, since President Jimmy Carter brokered a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt in 1979.

Hmmm. The most respected and prestigious newspaper in the country says one thing. M.J. Rosenberg, a hack whose livelihood depends on pushing the idea that the occupation is the be-all, end-all of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, says the opposite.

I think I'll stick with the Times.

As I write above, it's difficult to know WHAT Obama was trying to say, but he DIDN'T use the word "freeze" or "freezing" or anything like it.

So how then did Obama emphasize freezing settlements?

People of good will and understanding on both sides of the conflict have for several years recognized the broad outlines of a final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Having in 2005 withdrawn from every last inch of the Gaza Strip and in the process removed 10,000 civilians from 21 settlements, Israel will, in exchange for "secure and recognized boundaries," return most of the West Bank territories that it seized in 1967 when Jordan attacked it during the Six Day War. The suburbs of Jerusalem and a few large settlement blocs will remain under Israeli sovereignty, but Israel will evacuate tens of thousands more citizens. Jerusalem will stay Israel's capital, even as accommodations will be made for Palestinian self-government in East Jerusalem. And, because if implemented it would spell the destruction of Israel, the Palestinians will need to abandon their claim that all Palestinians--not merely those who left or were forced out of their homes between 1947 and 1949 during Israel's war of independence, but the millions of their children and their children's children living in Gaza, the West Bank, and in refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria--have the right to return to Jerusalem, Jaffa, and Haifa.

It was an even more generous offer--including the dismantling of most of the settlements and Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem--that Ehud Barak delivered to Yasser Arafat in July 2000 at Camp David. Rejecting the offer outright, Arafat proceeded a few months later to launch the Second Intifada and to release against Israel wave after wave of suicide bombers. While it is unlikely that, if Obama administration-initiated negotiations fail to yield an agreement, Abbas will launch a third intifada, little has changed that would allow him to sign the very generous deal rejected by Arafat, let alone the undoubtedly more restricted offer which would come from Netanyahu.

A wide swath of Israelis in and out of the national security establishment believe that Abbas does not want to go down in history as the Palestinian leader who yielded land or Jerusalem to the Jewish state. Abbas, they believe, will settle for nothing less than a return to the 1949 armistice boundaries or Green Line, which would place the entire Old City of Jerusalem under Palestinian authority and give Israel indefensible borders. And Abbas has given no sign that he is prepared to abandon the Palestinians' uncompromising belief in their right of return. Indeed, according to Giora Eiland, a former head of the Israeli National Security Council, the right of return is not merely non-negotiable for the Palestinians, but it and not a state of their own has all along been the Palestinians' main goal.

Ih25 has it right above. Obama backs off his call for a settlement freeze - which the Palestinians were saying was a precondition to negotiations - and calls for negotiations without preconditions. Obama explicitly calls for a Jewish State of Israel.

MJ is 0 for 2. Let's home Obama hits a home run on the final status negotiations. Then we'll forget the two big whiffs thus far.

I am frankly tired of seeing this banner flashing on my screen.

Gaza. Hamas. Conflict. Facts! Click here

Clicking on it reveals: "This official website, managed by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, provides factual information addressing the legal and political context of the conflict in Gaza, the issue of Gaza war crimes, the issue of human rights and the investigations into the Israeli military conduct during combat."

Going further reveals propaganda from the Government of Israel justifying their assaults on Arab civilians. Going even further uncovers the labeling of Justice Goldstone's UN Report as "blood libel."

Now paid ads for consumer products are one thing. Acting as a paid mouthpiece for a foreign power is quite another.

I wonder, has Josh Marshall registered as an agent of a foreign power, i.e. Israel?

Anna, I know Josh. He's pretty American. What are you? I have no problem with it but English is clearly not your first language.

i clicked on the gaza-hamas 'facts' ad. gonna do it everyday it's there. it probably pays by click-through so i figure i'd give TPM a few pennies from lieberman's coffer.

usa $ -----> israel $ -----> TPM

BDS: Boycott Divest Sanction

MJ: How do you feel about your BDS bedfellows? Do you support them in this (misguided, in my view) endeavor? If, as I suspect, you do not, then why are you continually silent to their entreaties, while you feel it appropriate to attack others who seek to point out that there are two sides to this unfortunate conflict?

I have come to think that Obama just doesn't understand the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He's flailing around with the same old lame peace-processism that has failed before. He needs to read some more books, or just give it up.

MJ,

I know you're the eternal optimist, but please explain to me how you can conceive of Netanyahu ever agreeing to a just peace settlement. If he can successfully resist Obama's pressure for a minimal show of good faith--halting further settlements--what basis is there for hope that he will ever agree to a peace that of necessity will require not merely a halt to new settlements, but the extensive dismantling of existing settlements and the repatriation of tens of thousands of Israelis?

"Setback for Barack Obama's peace initiative as Israel rejects call for settlement freeze".

It's that simple. Rosenberg is spinning as fast as he can to defend his little "western" white ethnocracy.
For once lets cut to the chase: the effort here is to preserve the ethnic homogeneity of a supposedly modern state.
M.J Rosenberg, a moderate reactionary, is terrified that the ultras, led by Netanyahu and Lieberman are leading the country to its doom. But he's still loyal, like a reformist minister in the last days of the Czar, or the Shah. He'll defend the morality of a dream that was always corrupt.

And Abu Mazen isn't even Petain.

"As nice as it would be, at the end of the day it is NOT America's business to force civilization on other people who are fundamentally incapable of it."

Neither is is America's business to fund terrorists to the tune of US$3 billion each year.

Those responsible for the wanton killing of hundreds of unarmed women and children, in December/January must be brought before the ICC.

This is democracy. This is justice.

bibi's chess move:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Haaretz on Wednesday that he would not agree to a Palestinian demand that Israel accept the 1967 borders as a condition for renewing peace negotiations.

Netanyahu also gave a condition of his own, saying Thursday that he would never drop his demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

your move, president obama

Thanks you for sharing. This information is very useful.
Best regards, Katya, CEO of facebook, openfiler iscsi windows 7