On Facebook I found myself faced with this question:
I guess Jordan Rapport, James Grosriques, and Johnny Chic and Michael Lumish are best suited to explain why Ben Shapiro and AIPAC both decry this move. So Does Deborah Lipstadt. Very serious conservative thinkers, with serious pro-Israel bonafides, have come out against this move. What am I missing?This was my response:
You are missing five things. The first is that Israel needs to stop allowing itself to be a groveling whipping-boy to its enemies like Tlaib and Omar. The second is that if Israel had let them into the country it would likely have been much worse as they would have used the opportunity to spotlight anything ugly that they could dig up, real or manufactured.
Third, you are demanding that Israel break its own laws in favor of the whims of demonstrable enemies. Fourth, they had no intention of going to Israel, instead they were going to "Palestine," with the implication that they believe Israel should not exist. They were not intending to engage in either diplomacy or educating themselves about that country. Their itinerary did not even include Israeli representatives, only those from the PA that literally pays young Arab men to kill Jews. Finally, virtually nobody in the US cares or even noticed.
So, let us try to keep things within a reasonable perspective. Israel, as you know, was in a lose-lose situation. It was upon the horns of a dilemma. Nonetheless, within a few weeks, this will be ancient history and the only people that will still care will be a tiny minority of antisemitic anti-Zionists of the kind that support Tlaib and Omar and those, such as ourselves, who seek to defend our brothers and sisters in Israel.
Oh, and by the way, I do not know why Shapiro should be particularly relevant to me given that I am not a conservative.