The shadow nation 8

Newt Gingrich said:

I believe if somebody goes around and says you don’t have a right to exist, they’re probably not prepared to negotiate for peace. I think if someone says they wanna wipe you out, you should believe them. So I see a much more tougher-minded, and much more honest approach to the Middle East in a Gingrich administration. … If I’m even-handed between a civilian democracy that obeys the rule of law, and a group of terrorists who are firing missiles everyday, that’s not even-handed. That’s favoring the terrorists. …  I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state … remember there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community. …  For a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940’s, and I think it’s tragic.

Newt Gingrich is absolutely right. There never was, in all history, a State of Palestine.

There could have been. In 1947, and many times since, Arab leaders turned down offers of territory which could be a Palestinian state. Their condition of acceptance has always been that a State of Palestine must exist instead of a State of Israel. Not beside it, but exactly where it is – all the territory over which the Israelis have legitimate sovereignty.

Arab historians attest to there having been no “Palestinian nation”.

Professor Philip Hitti told the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry into the Palestine problem in 1946:

There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not.

Professor Albert Hourani wrote on September 3, 1967, in The Observer:

A common land and language, a common political fate, and the shock of exile created a Palestinian Arab nation.

When Israel came into existence in 1948, on a tiny part of what had been the vast Ottoman empire – out of which several Arab states had also been created – the Arab states launched a war against it, and some 700,000 Arabs fled from their homes. Most of them remained within the borders of the area that had been the British mandate of “Palestine” since the end of the First World War. They were kept by their fellow Arabs – the Jordanian and Egyptian governments – in a condition of homelessness. Those governments could have created one or even two Palestinian states, but to allow the refugees a state of their own would have meant accepting the fact that Israel existed on what they claimed was “Arab land”, and that they would not do.

It was this homelessness and enforced separateness from other Arabs which turned the Palestinian Arabs into a nation. It can therefore be said that Zionism evoked “Palestinism”; that Israel cast a shadow – Palestine. The “Palestinians” came into existence alongside and because of the Israeli nation.

Contrary to widespread belief among politicians and would-be peace negotiators of the Western world, it is not the size of Israel that the Arabs object to, but that it should exist at all. The Arab case is that Israel has no “right” to exist. And this being so, negotiations for a “two state solution” are nugatory. If the Arab side enters talks at all, it is only to reiterate that they will never recognize Israel as a legitimate state; never recognize its “right to exist”. As Israelis are being asked absurdly to negotiate their own elimination, it is never Israel’s fault that such talks make no progress.

This is the first time a leading Western politician has spoken the truth about the “Palestinians” publicly, boldly and clearly. If Newt Gingrich becomes president of the USA, and does not allow the State Department to program him to utter its traditional falsehoods (which it won’t if John Bolton is appointed Secretary of State), the political tide that has been flowing so strongly and for so long in favor of the Arabs, may turn at last. It may have already begun to turn with candidate Gingrich’s statement of the truth. The degree of outrage with which Arab leaders and their sympathizers have reacted, is a signal that they see and fear a rising opposition at last to their campaign of lies, denigration, and relentless violence against Israel.

 

Jillian Becker  December 11, 2011

Posted under Arab States, Egypt, Israel, jihad, middle east, Palestinians, United States, War by Jillian Becker on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Tagged with

This post has 8 comments.

Permalink
  • TyS

    Let us be perfectly honest: a bowl of jello would be better than Obama; a bowl of jello’s inability to make decisions is infinitely better than Obama’s myriad horrid decisions.

    Religious argument aside, his statement is historically accurate.

    “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. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”-Zahir Muhsein – PLO Representative, 1977 

  • Don L

    Unfortunately fer wee’n atheetists..Gingrich (did he stole x-mas?) also says you have no morals nor values nor principles if you ain’t as believer in Christ and God…and that this is a christian nation.

    Now, hwe has actually spouted some Austrian economic principles (not ready to End The FED) and his true speak (I watched this debate) is encouraging.  He has announced that he will terminate federal judges who rule against prayer in school and the like.  GRRR!

    Yup…It’ll probably be Newt I have to give it up for…someday Freedom From Religion will be allowed in IOWA. 

    • Liz

      Yeah, the religious slant, as with all of them, is rather gagging.  But I would rather get him than, say, Perry, who would force everyone into weekly prayer and fasting and probably revive the Klu Klux Klan if given the chance.
      At least Gingrich seems to have a grasp on economic principles and maybe foreign policy.

      • Don L

        Yeah Perry…he not only has the collectivist attitude of I can do anything I want, but a statist I can do anything too…Bachman won points when she brought up his forcing 12 year old girls, paranets notwithstanding, to have the anti-cancer shots…in the name of the state. 

    • Andrew M

      “There is no position on which people are so immovable as
      their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can
      claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or
      whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful
      weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be
      used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing
      throughout our land are not using their religious clout with
      wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into
      following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with
      these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they
      complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or
      both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers
      across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be
      a moral person, I must believe in ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C,’ and ‘D.’ Just who
      do they think they are? And from where do they presume to
      claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am
      even more angry as a legislator who must endure the
      threats of every religious group who thinks it has some
      God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the
      Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every
      step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions
      to all Americans in the name of ‘conservatism.’ “- Barry Goldwater (1909-1998), the last true conservative

      • Don L

        Great quote…thanks.  I did not know he’d ever thought this/that way. 

      • Liz

        Awesome quotes, from Tys and Andrew. 
        Hard to cover up the blatant lies of the PLO when you have the truth coming out of their own mouth.

        Where are the conservatives like Goldwater when we need them???  He actually had the guts to be honest.  And the “political preachers” haven’t changed.  It’s time for their bubble to burst, but it just keeps getting bigger.     

  • Liz

    Bravo to Gingrich for being honest instead of politically correct.  If thats any indication of how he might handle things as President, he might not be a bad choice.