Why A New Taliban Leader Means Peace Is Imminent In Afghanistan
The new Taliban leader might be just what is needed to bring peace to that nation and steer the Taliban away from violenceRead More »
Newt Gingrich hit it out of the park with his succinct assessment of the “Palestinian” cause.
One of the most incorrigible fallacies pertaining to the Middle East is the notion that the Palestinians are entitled to a state of their own. This fallacy stems from the misconception that there is a nation of ‘Palestinians’, and to the extent that such a nation exists, this name is an accurate representation of the Arabs who live in modern Israel. This artful manipulation of the geopolitical lexicon was meant to bestow upon a group of random Arabs a false sense of geographical ties to the Holy Land.
In 1977, during an interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw, PLO Executive Committee member Zuheir Mohsen described the stratagem as this:
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism.”
This delusion is no trivial matter. For years, the left wing foreign policy establishment has rapturously promoted the ‘Palestinians’ as the cause célèbre of our national security interests. Instead of focusing on the real threats to our national security (such as those who, incidentally, fund the so-called Palestinians), the foreign policy establishment has singularly focused on creating a state for the most virulently anti-American people on the face of the planet. Their maniacal fixation on the Palestinians has left them devoid of solutions regarding the broader turmoil in the Middle East.
The first step in undoing this foreign policy mess is for the next president to deracinate the entire myth of a ‘Palestinian people’. Kudos to Newt Gingrich for finally telling the truth about the geopolitical cause célèbre of all the world’s imbeciles.
In a TV interview with the Jewish Channel, Gingrich made the following basic observation:
“Remember, there was no Palestine as a state — (it was) part of the Ottoman Empire. I think we have an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and historically part of the Arab community and they had the chance to go many places for a variety of political reasons, we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s.”
This is the type of fighting spirit that everyone on the right – both admirers and detractors – appreciates about Newt.
All students of history, barring those who attended left-wing universities, know that the origin of the term Palestine comes from the Roman Empire. When they captured Judea during the first century, the Romans renamed the Jewish kingdom ‘Palestine’ after the ancient Philistines referenced in the Bible. After the British kicked out the Ottoman Turks from Transjordan (comprised of modern-day Israel and Jordan), they renamed it the British Mandate of Palestine, once again hearkening back to its ancient etymology. Although the original Balfour Declaration called for a Jewish homeland in the entirety of this territory, 78% of it was ultimately siphoned off for the modern state of Jordan in 1946. Unsatisfied with 78% of the territory, Jordan invaded the new Jewish state of Israel in 1948 and illegally occupied half of the remaining 22% of the territory for 18 years.
In 1967, the Jordanians (not the so-called Palestinians), along with its Arab neighbors, invaded Israel once again in the hopes that they would wipe out the remaining Jewish presence. Israel won that war and kicked out the Jordanians from the land they illegally occupied, known as the West Bank. This land has nothing to do with a Palestinian people; it was illegally part of Jordan for 18 years. 80% of the so-called Palestinians are Jordanian Arabs. Hence, there already is a ‘Palestinian state’ in Jordan.
Not surprisingly, gas bag Michigan Senator Carl Levin decried Gingrich’s fact check as “cynical”, “divisive, and destructive,” even as he declined to challenge the veracity of the GOP hopeful’s statement:
“the vast majority of American Jews — including this one — and the Israeli government … are committed to a two-state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians live side-by-side as neighbors and in peace.
“Gingrich’s cynical efforts to attract attention to himself with divisive and destructive statements will not help his presidential ambitions,” Levin said, “since they are aimed at putting the peace between Israel and the Palestinians that Americans yearn for even further out of reach than it is today.”
Memo to dinosaur Senator Levin: No, this is not a cynical ploy to garner Jewish support because Gingrich (and every other GOP candidate for that matter) understands that he will not obtain a significant minority of the Jewish vote, let alone a majority. Believe it or not, Mr. Levin, there are those who actually understand history, and intuitively reject the notion that we should invest our time and treasure into a lie. If there is anything cynical, divisive, and destructive, it is your pathetic attempt to use your religious identity to shield Obama from the vices of being the most pro-‘Palestinian’ president in American history.
The Palestinians are the
global warming climate change of geopolitical conflict. They use deceptive parlance to advance their agenda. Thankfully, Newt is speaking the truth, instead of worshiping at the altar of the pan-Islamists in the UN. Mitt Romney is accusing him of undercutting the Israelis, but Newt was wise to express the truth from the American perspective. There is no national interest for America in the creation of a state for a non-entity, irrespective of what the Israelis chose for their own interests.
It’s these moments of straight talk from Gingrich that resonate with conservatives. Now, if only he would govern with the same conviction and audacity that is reflected in his rhetoric…..