Where's the birth certificate

Free and Strong America

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

The Myth of the 'Palestinian People'







Sharon Owens raises the preferred, oft repeated charge of the Left cconcerning the main, perceived problem in the affairs of the Middle East ...




"Osama bin Laden may be no more, but already the experts are saying the trouble is not over. The central issue in the Middle East remains: the dream of an independent Palestinian state.



And until that happens, so they say, global terrorism will continue unabated. Many of us ordinary non-experts now doubt even this latest wisdom. Perhaps nothing less than a new Islamic World Order is the goal of the terrorists?"





Yes, starting years ago we read that the idea of a 'Palestinian' people is nothing but a pipe dream, eagerly repeated by the lapdog media on this side of the Atlantic. If you doubt for a moment that this is simply a modern concoction aimed at dividing Americans and open-minded Westerners about the concept, simply read what Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein said about the situation to a Dutch newspaper back in the day...





"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."




One VERY pragmatic assessment of the situation on the ground in that part of the world was was written by MENSA member and blogger Vox Day...


"In considering this, I note that it is irrelevant to debate the question of whether the descendants of Ashkenazi European Zionists hold the same historical claim to the land of Israel as Sephardic Jews, given that the way in which that historical claim is based on an identical right of conquest. From the historical perspective, the primary issue is the realization that the situation will remain violent until one of three things happens:

1) The Palestinians accept their conquest and are peacefully digested into a trans-tribal Israeli identity.
2) The Israelis are forced to withdraw to the United States and Europe.
3) The Palestinians are forced to withdraw to the neighboring Arab countries.

Given the decades-long failure of various parties to force option (1) through a wide variety of measures, to say nothing of the obvious futility of attempting to construct a modern representative democracy with an electorate that would include a large and understandably bitter tribal near-majority, it's not a reasonable strategy. Option (2) is even less tenable given the military balance of power, leaving option (3) is the only possible solution regardless of one's sympathies or distaste for forced population movements.



Understand that I'm not advocating this option, I'm merely pointing out the strategic realities of the situation. My actual position is total indifference to the Gaza invasion, which those who read this blog have probably gleaned already based on my failure to so much as mention it prior to this post. If the Palestinians don't want to have their territory, which is held only by the permission of the Israeli authorities, strafed by IDF rockets and overrun by IDF tanks, then they should refrain from annoying their conquerers by firing mortars at them."





I tend to concur, especially given that these people living in that part of the world are constantly being subjected to outside influences from agitators such as Syria and Iran. What are your thoughts on the matter?
























5 comments:

Ross said...

I don't understand this issue properly, but I do understand that under the 1948 UN partition plan, a two state solution was offered, but the Palestinians turned it down. Is this correct? I speak as a Christian who loves the Jewish people, but feels sorry for the Palestinians too.

PS: I see you left a comment on The Batcave. Good on you.

gschrls7 said...

There are no "Palestinian" people. They are just ordinary Arabs who are claiming land that belongs to the Jews.

gschrls7 said...

What would happen if the Jews just gave all of Israel to the "Palestinians"? Well, they would still be fighting and killing each other. Also Muslims would feel they had gotten rid of the "little satan", which is what they called Israel, so now they need to rid of the "big satan, which is what they called the USA.
The world seems to be blind to the fact that the Muslims blow up their own mosques also if they feel led to do so.

gschrls7 said...

The Apple Of His Eye

Like a newborn that's fighting for its life,
you have endured so much sorrow and strife.
And now your enemies would conquer you,
but you have a helper faithful and true.

You may not know it, but He hears your cry,
and you are still the apple of his eye.
You need to know, and simply understand,
you are written in the palm of his hand.

As we pray for your peace, and hope so too,
but it is sorrow for those who hate you.
Israel, stand and hold your head up high,
for you are still the apple of his eye.

JD Curtis said...

I don't understand this issue properly, but I do understand that under the 1948 UN partition plan, a two state solution was offered, but the Palestinians turned it down. Is this correct?

"The 1967 lines were never borders in any formally recognized sense. Those were the armistice lines at which Israel stopped the advance of the attacking Arab armies in the 1948 war at Israel's birth. Neither Israel, nor any Arab nation, nor even the UN ever recognized those lines as the official borders of Israel.

UN mandates and resolutions have called only for Israel to negotiate a final border with a Palestinian state for the region's Arab refugees, which Israel has agreed to do. These refugees were never expelled from Israel. They originally fled from the area upon the order of the invading Arab armies. Nearly a million Arabs live within Israel today with all of the standard rights typical of citizens of western countries, equal to the rights of Jewish citizens.

It is only decades of repetition of sophisticated propaganda that leaves us today referring to the West Bank as occupied land. The historic name for those West Bank territories is Judea and Samaria. I will leave you to ponder the etymological roots of that name "Judea."

President Obama's 1967 borders would divide Israel's original historical capital of Jerusalem, returning Arab control over East Jerusalem. That would include the Old City where King David ruled in 1000 BC.

Jewish settlements in the West Bank are legal under international law since the land was won in a defensive war, after Israel was attacked in 1967. Those settlements consequently are not illegal occupations of Palestinian territory. Those settlements are presently subject to further negotiation, as is the rest of the West Bank." Link