I have to say, I've been a bit surprised by the reaction to Ted Cruz being booed off the stage for defending Israel at a conference of Middle Eastern Christians. Not at the booing itself, mind you (we'll come back to that in a moment). But the reaction to the booing among certain quarters has been odd. I'm old enough to remember headlines like
when Democrats booed the inclusion of language about Israel at their national convention in 2012. At the very least, the optics of the national gathering of the Democratic Party booing the Jewish State are terrible. And the optics of a gathering of Arab Christians with connections to various terror organizations and other unsavory, anti-Israel, anti-U.S. regimes who are trying to garner sympathy in the United States booing the invocation of Jewish and Christian unity are similarly terrible. Apologists for the In Defense of Christians conference have suggested that the audience was booing Cruz's "hijacking" of the keynote address, but I dunno, man. You can watch the video, captured by the Brody File, for yourself here. I'll tell you what I hear: at first, a smattering of applause accompanied by a smattering of outraged cries. To which Cruz says, "Those who hate Israel, hate America," which prompts a much more vocal groan of outrage. Then Cruz says, "Those who hate Jews, hate Christians," prompting even more boos.* Vociferously booing those two rather commonsense, unobjectionable statements means, to me, that there was a sizable contingent in the audience that feels that it is totally fine to denigrate Israel and support America, to denigrate Jews but love Christians. I'm glad a United States senator stood up to that sort of response.
That a vocal segment of the gathering would express their disgust for the equation of Jews and Christians, Israel and America, is not terribly surprising. Alana Goodman covered the antipathy some of the conference's participants have for the Jewish state. And the Weekly Standard's Lee Smith relates a pretty fascinating story of his own run-in with IDC participants here. It's worth quoting Smith at length:
IDC’s proclaimed purpose—to protect Christians in the face of a jihadist onslaught led at present by ISIS—is of utmost importance. However, too many of the priests, prelates, and patriarchs from Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, as well as one of the organization’s key benefactors, Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire Gilbert Chagoury, have also identified themselves as supporters of the Iranian axis in the Middle East. ISIS is a murderous group, but so is the regime in Tehran and so are its clients, chief among them Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
ISIS, as the world now knows all too well, has used beheadings, crucifixions, and all forms of murder and torture to terrorize its opponents, who include Christians, Yazidis, Alawites, Shiite Muslims, and Sunnis who don’t pledge fealty. But Assad’s record in Syria is no better. Besides the gas attacks and indiscriminate bombings that have killed tens of thousands of innocents, his security forces have specialized in acts of vindictive sadism. Early in the uprising, for instance, they mutilated the corpse of a 13-year-old boy before returning the body to his parents.
And yet many of the clerics invited to speak at the IDC conference are openly supportive of Assad. For instance, Maronite patriarch Bechara Boutros al-Rai calls Assad a reformer. Maybe he took that message to the White House when he met with Obama and Susan Rice Thursday afternoon to ask for continued American support for the Lebanese Armed Forces, even if its military intelligence unit is controlled by Hezbollah. But whatever is wrong with Hezbollah or Assad, many of the IDC clerics reason, at least they’re killing the Sunni extremists who would kill them.
You should read Smith's whole piece, which recounts his run-in with an IDC participant who, after Smith sent a bottle of champagne over with a sarcastic note of congratulations, called the cops on Smith. As Smith notes, this is not the response of a classical liberal committed to freedom. It's not the response of a person who shares America's values. It's the response of a humorless prat more comfortable operating in the confines of a police state.
Drawing attention to the plight of Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere is a good thing. As one of my writers noted on Twitter, the Beacon has been doing just that since its founding. But facts are stubborn things, and their inconvenience does not alter their truth. If we're going to honestly deal with the threat of ISIS and the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, we cannot blind ourselves to the fact that they are teaming up with some nasty people who do not care for the United States or her allies. And we shouldn't pretend that animus aimed at Israel is anything other than just that.
*Interestingly, the paleocon flagship omitted those extremely loud and noticeable boos from its transcript/writeup. I can't imagine why.