The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) – the bugaboo of the anti-Semitic, anti-Israel left – castrated itself approximately two years ago when they refused to press the Senate to bring up a vote on President Obama’s catastrophic Iran deal, preferring instead not to alienate Democrats. Now, Jane Eisner of The Forward is attempting to lead a boycott against 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump thanks to his ridiculous assertions of neutrality between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
That’s all well and good – nobody has the obligation to stick around at a pro-Israel conference to listen to the meandering idiocies of a man who draws moral equivalence between free people and terrorists.
But it’s Eisner’s other suggestion that truly rankles, and demonstrates that for much of the supposedly pro-Israel community on the left, the leftism comes first and the pro-Israel comes second. Here’s Eisner’s suggestion: force Trump to speak right before former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, so that she can rebut everything he says: “Let her eviscerate him. That’ll give him a taste of what’s to come.”
That’s absurd. If you’re going to boycott Trump, which is understandable, at the very least you should be boycotting Hillary, whose actual record is significantly more anti-Israel than Trump’s. Hillary is the woman who corresponded regularly with vicious anti-Israel viper Sidney Blumenthal, a man who lectured her consistently on the dangers of the “Israeli leadership and the US Jewish community” and sent her the work of his son, outright anti-Semitic terror lackey Max Blumenthal. She’s the woman who helped initiate the Iran deal, the worst international agreement in the history of the Middle East. She’s the woman whose State Department condemned Israel for defending itself during the Gaza War and labeled Jerusalem not a part of Israel. She’s the anti-Israel extremist who personally called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in March 2010 to scream at him about Jews building bathrooms in Jerusalem, who slammed Israel in December 2011 as moving in the “opposite direction” of democracy and categorized voluntarily sex-segregated buses as “more suited to Iran than Israel,” who said in December 2012 that Israelis had a “lack of empathy” for Palestinians and needed to “demonstrate that they do understand the pain of an oppressed people in their mind.”
But no boycott for Hillary, apparently.
Presumably, AIPAC itself might agree with this logic. In 2012, then-presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) wasn’t invited to AIPAC because of his long history of association with anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. That was fine. President Obama, however, brought all of his anti-Israel baggage to the event, where he received a massive ovation. That was disgusting then. Doing the same for Hillary now would be even more repulsive.
It has become obvious over the past several years that AIPAC has two state purposes, one useful, and one counterproductive. The useful purpose: bringing American politicians to Israel so they can see the situation first-hand. The counterproductive purpose: touting itself as the pro-Israel lobbying organization when it refuses to punish Democrats who are anti-Israel. That only lends cover to anti-Israel policies so long as they come from Democrats, as we saw with the Iran deal.
So, should people walk out of Trump’s speech? Sure. But they’d be hypocrites to do that and yet stick around for the far worse and far more dangerous Hillary Clinton.