http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/route_17/indonesia_where_israelis_cant_enter_obama_tells_jews_where_they_cant_live In Indonesia, Where Israelis Can't Enter, Obama Tells Jews Where They Can't Live
Submitted by Jonathan Mark on Thu, 11/11/2010 - 08:03
Share
In Democratic circles, it is scandalous to join a club that excludes women, say, or blacks or gays. The New York Times, a few years ago, devoted dozens of articles, many on the front page, to the horror of the Master's Tournament being held in a golf club for men only, in Augusta, Georgia.
The same high standards don't apply to places excluding Jews. This past week, saw Obama, now called "Imam Obama" by Rush Limbaugh, visit Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, where Israeli aren't allowed to visit. Did he say anything about Indonesia's treatment of Israelis and Jews in the course of his pandering and groveling, as is norm when speaking to Muslims? Of course not. But he did say Jews should not live in parts of Jerusalem. As if that's any of his business.
Exactly why is that his business? If Indonesia's anti-Semitic policies are not for him to discuss, why is Jerusalem his business, except that this son of Indonesia clearly sees himself as the Palestinians' water carrier.
Obama beieves that Israel must engage in non-stop "confidence building" for Palestinians. He demands nothing that might give Israelis more confidence in either him, or his Munich peace process.
Of course, "progressive" Jews don't give a damn that Israelis are banned from Indonesia. Have you seen one Jewish paper, or blogger, or organization, say anything at all about that? These Jews shouldn't call themselves "Progressives," they should call themselves the "Regressives," because they're a throwback to the days when Jews were timid and deferential, when demanding that they and their people be treated with dignity was left to the heroic few,
How embarassing can Obama's Jewish sycophants get? How these Obama Jews ask for nothing from Obama regarding Indonesia's exclusion and delegitimization of Israel, but jumping and quivering when Obama snaps at Israel on Jerusalem, as if saying, "Yes, sir, it's our fault. It's all our fault." Or more exactly, "It's all Israel's fault so don't blame us, we're your sycophants.".
Why is The Wall Street Journal more cognizant than most Jewish newspapers and commentators of the irony and shame of Obama excoriating Israel in a country where Israelis are excluded? Because the Journal has a sense of right and wrong.
Here's part of the WSJ's editorial:
"Why Mr. Obama chose to pick this fight from the distance of Southeast Asia is anyone's guess. Israel's decision to proceed with the building of some 1,000 housing units in the Har Homa neighborhood of municipal Jerusalem—a 'settlement' only in the most jaundiced sense of the term—was made in October. Israeli governments of both the right and left have encouraged similar building projects since Jerusalem was reunified in 1967. And construction of the new housing will not begin for months if not years.
"None of that deterred Mr. Obama, who warned the Israeli government that 'this kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations.' The State Department also chimed in, saying it was 'deeply disappointed,' while Palestinian spokesman Saeb Erekat added that the new construction proves 'that Israel chooses settlements, not peace.' This is the same Mr. Erekat who recently wrote an admiring letter to Ahmed Sa'adat, the mastermind of the 2001 assassination of an Israeli cabinet member.
"All Israel has done is insist that Jews have a right to live anywhere in their capital city, something that might be controversial in Ramallah but ought not to be in Washington. Mr. Obama's public endorsement of the Palestinian view of what constitutes a settlement only puts the negotiated peace he seeks further out of reach.
"Meanwhile, the Indonesian government forbids Israeli citizens from visiting their country. If Mr. Obama wants to bridge the distance between Jakarta and Jerusalem, maybe he can start with that one."