A related aside. Interesting that M.J. Rosenberg has made it a point to mention the Goldstone Report in his latest post:

3)Gaza. The Gaza was a disaster, first, for the people of Gaza. But it also was a disaster for Israel's public relations. That is why the Israeli government is trying so hard to discredit the Goldstone report. It won't work. The facts of Gaza speak for themselves.

without mentioning what went on at the U.N.

This strikes me as a lobbyist trying to deflect his following on the left from getting upset about the facts of what the Obama administration is doing about the Goldstone report at the U.N. The administration is trying to get it off the table, they see the report not only as trouble, but "deeply flawed." Rosenberg is pushing a scenario where it's only Israel doing that.

Rosenberg is pushing a scenario where it's only Israel doing that.

Poor MJ. Perhaps he still believes that this Democratic administration can be perceived as an "honest broker" so ignores all the evidence to the contrary despite the early indicators that it's bidness as usual when it comes to the American mandate to run interference for Israel @ the UN:

Some of the earliest moves have been symbolic, like making the controversial decision to rejoin the troubled U.N. Human Rights Council — where, Rice said, the United States will battle "the anti-Israel crap."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20881.html

Human Rights Watch has collected US statements re the Goldstone report so you don't have to:

“[I]n this, as in many other respects, the US focus, and I think constructively the focus of many other countries, is to try to look not to the past but to the future. The best way to end suffering and abuses is for there to be a long term solution and peace based on two states living side by side in peace and security.” 
 – Rice, September 22, 2009.


The US insists that Israel can investigate itself…


“The United States understands that Israel is a vibrant and strong democracy and it has more than sufficient capacity to conduct a credible internal investigation and we’ve encouraged it to do so.”
– Rice, September 22, 2009.

“We are confident that Israel, as a democracy with a well-established commitment to rule of law, has the institutions and ability to carry out robust investigations into these allegations. We note that Israel has stated publicly it has already investigated at least 100 complaints related to the Gaza conflict, including about some incidents mentioned in the report, and is currently pursuing action in 23 individual cases. The findings from each of its investigations [are] subject to multiple independent layers of review. We encourage Israel to utilize appropriate domestic review procedures and meaningful accountability mechanisms to investigate and address all credible allegations of misconduct or violations of international law.”
– US Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner, September 29, 2009.

snip]

The US claims Goldstone’s report shows a lack of “balance”…


“[T]he weight of the report is something like 85 percent oriented towards very specific and harsh condemnation and conclusions related to Israel and very sort of lightly treats without great specificity Hamas’ terrorism and its own atrocities. So in that respect it remains unbalanced, although obviously less so than it might have been and so that is still a source of significant concern.”
– Rice, September 22, 2009.

“The report further calls on Israel to undertake a moratorium on the use of certain munitions; it makes no such demand of Hamas with regard to its use of indiscriminate rockets. These unbalanced recommendations taint many of the report’s suggestions for international action.”
– Posner, September 29, 2009.

snip]

The US claims Goldstone’s mandate was biased…


“But the fundamental problem with this particular report is it was hatched with a bias inherent in its mandate. It is as a consequence a product that largely reflects that imbalance in its mandate, notwithstanding the effort to look at the other side to some extent, albeit a lesser extent.”
– Rice, September 22, 2009.



Even though the mandate covered both sides.


snip]

“National militaries engaged in asymmetrical warfare must remain bound by humanitarian law, but it is a stark and tragic reality that terrorists systematically ignore these laws. Actions by terrorist groups that have the effect of employing civilians as human shields put enormous pressures on militaries that are trying to protect civilians and their own soldiers, an issue faced by many militaries today. Although the Goldstone report deals briefly with these issues, its findings of fact and law are tentative and equivocating.”
– Posner, September 29, 2009.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/10/01/why-no-justice-gaza-israel-different-and-so

Those of us who have followed the issue of the Goldstone report in the Israeli media are quite aware that the quotes above largely reiterate talking points distributed by Israeli politicians, diplomats and the Foreign Ministry.

The HRW article includes evidence debunking the American statements and pointing out our hypocrisy. Be sure to avoid reading it if you prefer the fairytale feelgood version of reality.

Looks like a hard line on Iran nukes and on Hezbollah is one thing they are sticking with:

Remarks at the Israeli Presidential Conference 2009

Susan E. Rice

U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations , U.S. Mission to the United Nations
Jerusalem

October 21, 2009

http://www.state.gov/p/io/rls/rm/2009/130802.htm

Relevant excerpts:

....President Peres has asked us here, in the words of this conference’s theme, to face tomorrow. He has asked me to talk about the ways that the United States, and the State of Israel, and the world can turn crisis into opportunity. That’s a daunting task, Mr. President, but allow me to describe the vision of the world that President Obama believes lies within our grasp—if we have the courage to seize it. And I will then offer some thoughts on what it will require from all of us to get there.

The right place to start is with a common vision—not of some distant future but of the world we seek for our children and our grandchildren. Our view of that world is rooted in a truth that my nation has long held to be self-evident: and that is that all people are created equal—of equal worth, of equal consequence, and with equal rights.

....The United States has a clear vision of the future we hope to build together with partners around the globe—a future that rests on the values that underpin the American creed, and a future that we can only create if we stand together.

We seek a world in which government is a means to advance human rights, not a tool to suppress them. A world where violent extremism is rejected, whether from al-Qaeda, Hizballah, or others. A world where nuclear danger, climate change, hunger, poverty, disease, and illiteracy are beaten back—and where access to education and opportunity rises. A world where we have finally learned the lessons of the Holocaust, of Rwanda, of Darfur—where we put effective action behind the words “never again” by finally ending genocide. A world where governments rid their schools and their textbooks of lies about those who are different, including slurs about Zionism, the Jewish people, or any religious, racial, and ethnic group. A world where women and girls fulfill their own potential and are indispensable to national growth and development. A world of liberty and prosperity—of greater decency, dignity, and democracy. A world where a child can grow up in Gaza, in Tel Aviv, in Baghdad, in Bamako, or in Kabul, free of fear, free of want, and with the opportunity to live their dreams.

All of this would, of course, be in America’s interests and in Israel’s interests. But it also reflects the common aspirations of people around the globe.

Now, we have no illusions that building this world will be quick or easy—but the difficulty of the task must not serve as an excuse for inaction.

We know what is holding us back: short-term, short-sighted definitions of self-interest; governments that view power, resources, and markets simply as zero-sum competitions; countries that suffer from weak governance and corrupt institutions that fail their citizens; and leaders who value their own grip on power above the interests of their own people.

By indulging old habits, we run new risks. We know which way the trend lines point: toward a world of unchecked nuclear proliferation; a world in which violent extremists continue to menace us all; a Middle East roiled by conflict and radicalized by despair; a world where strife and genocide claim the lives of more innocents; a world of bitter division between the haves and have-nots; and a planet driven ever closer to the brink of environmental disaster. So, the status quo, ladies and gentlemen, is not static at all. Treading water above powerful undertows will only leave us driven farther and farther from shore.

And that is why President Obama often speaks of what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called “the fierce urgency of now”—of the pressing need to grasp opportunities that will soon pass us by. Inertia in the face of great challenges carries even greater dangers. If we fail to take bold action to solve common problems, we will all be left at greater peril.

So we must choose: to continue business as usual in a vain attempt to withstand the whirlwind, or to work together to seize this rare chance for deep and lasting change—change driven by transformational leadership, reinforced by partners with the will to seek lasting progress, embedded in effective institutions, and supported by visionary citizens and publics who understand our mission and our moment.

....We must all take responsibility for stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and pursuing the goal of a world without them. The United States has reaffirmed the basic bargain behind the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have a responsibility to move toward disarmament; and that those without them have the responsibility to forsake them.

We must all take responsibility for ensuring that nations that refuse to live up to their nuclear obligations pay a price. America understands the stakes. As I have said repeatedly in the United Nations Security Council, the United States will not waver in its determination to ensure that Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons capabilities. If the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards and requirements; if they threaten their neighbors and place nuclear weapons ambitions over the security and opportunity of their own people—then they will be held accountable. The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise and that treaties will be enforced.

We must all take responsibility for bringing stability and greater opportunity to the Middle East. The United States will keep faith with the Iraqi people, renewing our efforts to ease the suffering of Iraqi citizens displaced by years of war and helping them reintegrate into Iraqi society. We will work with others to support a sovereign and democratic Iraq to take full responsibility for its own future as it deepens and strengthens its institutions and looks forward to its elections. And we will pursue broader partnerships with the people of the region to advance education, employment, and entrepreneurship.

We must all take responsibility for the pursuit of peace and security. The United States is working with vigor and resolve to bring about a just and lasting peace between Israelis, Palestinians, and the Arab world. The time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. Our goal is clear: a comprehensive peace, including two states living side by side in peace and security—a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. This is in the interests of the United States, of Israel, and of the Palestinians.

But we all must decide whether we are serious about peace or whether we will lend it only lip service. As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday—that Israel can find peace, security, and prosperity with not just its immediate neighbors but in the region as a whole and that Israel can truly and fully take its rightful place among the nations, and that Palestinians can at last enjoy the dignity and blessings of freedom in an independent state of their own.

....We must all take responsibility for bringing stability and greater opportunity to the Middle East. The United States will keep faith with the Iraqi people, renewing our efforts to ease the suffering of Iraqi citizens displaced by years of war and helping them reintegrate into Iraqi society. We will work with others to support a sovereign and democratic Iraq to take full responsibility for its own future as it deepens and strengthens its institutions and looks forward to its elections. And we will pursue broader partnerships with the people of the region to advance education, employment, and entrepreneurship.

We must all take responsibility for the pursuit of peace and security. The United States is working with vigor and resolve to bring about a just and lasting peace between Israelis, Palestinians, and the Arab world. The time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. Our goal is clear: a comprehensive peace, including two states living side by side in peace and security—a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. This is in the interests of the United States, of Israel, and of the Palestinians.

But we all must decide whether we are serious about peace or whether we will lend it only lip service. As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday—that Israel can find peace, security, and prosperity with not just its immediate neighbors but in the region as a whole and that Israel can truly and fully take its rightful place among the nations, and that Palestinians can at last enjoy the dignity and blessings of freedom in an independent state of their own.

....We need cooperation among great powers and constructive contributions from all powers. We need alliances that work and partners that shoulder their share of the common burden. We need to work together to isolate spoilers. We need to join together to counter states that defy their international responsibilities even as we ensure that they have off-ramps should they choose a more responsible course. We need stronger mechanisms for conflict prevention and conflict resolution. And finally, we need more durable vehicles to promote economic development, democracy, and good governance. We need strong institutions, not strong men, to help lay a lasting foundation for global stability and sustainable growth.

To say the least, this is an ambitious agenda. But surely the State of Israel is one country that believes that human beings can and must do great things together—a country that has seen its extraordinary democratic institutions rise with miraculous speed—a country that knows that the trampled fields of war can shelter seeds of peace—a country that believes t in Herzl’s words, if you will it, it is no dream.

These responsibilities do not rest with leaders alone. Ordinary citizens must do their vital part—and heed the call to service and sacrifice. No climate pact will make the difference if consumers do not change the cars they drive or the way they insulate their homes. No peace will truly last if leaders are not held accountable for faithful implementation of their obligations and if citizens lose heart in the promise of a brighter future. Shared security rests on public resolve, common understanding, and united will.

Some will always scoff. Some will choose not to choose. Some will prefer drift to action. But history is made by those on the playing field, not those sitting in the cheap seats.

Decades from now, students sitting in classrooms from Jerusalem to Jakarta will learn about the life of Shimon Peres—and everyone will have forgotten those who grumble today from the sidelines or who are too caught up in short-term political interests to stand up for the interests of generations to come.

Decades from now, people in Egypt, Jordan, and Israel will still praise Anwar al-Sadat, Menachem Begin, King Hussein, Yitzhak Rabin, and other Arab and Israeli leaders who knew that peace is always possible.

And decades from now, people will remember the leaders from this historic moment who took responsibility for our shared destiny and they will remember the citizens who refused to allow differences to define them.

We can be remembered as a generation that evaded the hard choices, that looked away, and that left its children less safe and less secure. Or we can come together to advance our interests, to stand up for our values, and to strengthen our common security by investing in our common humanity.

The stakes are high. The choice is urgent. But America believes that, together, we can and we must rise to history’s call.

Thank you very much.

The New York Times is strongly suggestive of Obama admin. failure as fact (note this front-page article today is not labeled "analysis"):

Top Palestinian Rules Out Race for Re-election By ETHAN BRONNER and MARK LANDLER

RAMALLAH, West Bank — The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, warned on Thursday that he would not seek re-election, the latest sign that the Obama administration’s drive to broker a Middle East peace accord, one of President Obama’s key foreign policy goals, has fallen into disarray.

Mr. Abbas, 74, has threatened to step aside before, but coming immediately after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s visit to the region aimed at reviving a peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, his announcement laid bare the deepening tensions over the administration’s failure to extract an Israeli settlement freeze or any concessions from Arab leaders.

Mrs. Clinton’s visit, which she characterized as a success, sowed anger and confusion among Palestinians and other Arabs after she praised as “unprecedented” the offer by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to slow down, but not stop, construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank....