Posted on 12/09/2011 3:19:40 PM PST by yank in the UK
Gingrich is right in this. PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said this in 1977: 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.
Many Lebanese have a different (non-Arab) lineage than Jordanians, Palestinians, or Syrians - I believe many were there at the time of the Old Testament, pre-dating the Arab (and subsequent Turkish) invasions. I have Palestinian coins from 1942; what should those people call themselves?
If they’re all Arabs anyway, why use names like “Jordanians”, “Syrians”, “Iraqis”, “Saudis”, “Moroccans”, etc.
They are a tribe of arabs, there was no Palestine or Palestinians until the Brits ran things after WW1.
Newt is correct on this.
I have to give props to Newt for speaking the truth on this point.
“They are a tribe of arabs, there was no Palestine or Palestinians until the Brits ran things after WW1.”
I understand what you are saying, but how are they different from Jordanians or Syrians in that respect? They were all former colonies of Europe.
The story seems to me to be about WHY they call themselves what they call themselves. It’s the why not the what.
What should they call themselves?
What name would be acceptable?
Considering “Palestine” is an area and not a state..... perhaps, Arabs?
As usual Newt is right.
which is what they are.
That’s not a state either. If it is an area, and they live there, what else would they be called?
Armenians were Armenians whether or not there was an Armenian state; it was a geographic area.
What should they call themselves?
Terrorists!
“Syrians and Jordanians which is what they are.”
I don’t see them accepting your proposal (or your logic).
Palestine is a corruption of ‘Philistine’ and the current day Palestinians do have verified genetic ties to the Libyans and Tunisians. Their common history comes via the Carthaginians who were descendants of the Philistines.
Not to take the side of the Palestinians (who I’d just as soon see frog-marched into the Jordanian desert) but the fact of the matter is that modern day Palestine is no less real or fake than modern day Israel. Both came into existence at the same time. Both are nations of people who hold a nationalistic identity but the difference is that one people, Israel, have land. The Palestinians could easily have land in some Arab country were it not for the fact that most Arabs hate the Palestinians more than the Israelis ever did.
Arabs claim descendency from Esau and, by extension, Abraham. Jacob, as the father of the Jews (and, again by extension, Christians, their cousins) is in their view a treacherous interloper as is Rebekah and, by extension, women in general.
This is a key reason why the Islamic mind looks down on women, Jews and Christians and considers themselves the rightful rulers of mankind.
The various factions of Islam have slightly different interpretations but all agree on this topic if you directly ask them.
Few Christians and secular Jews understand this thought process, but it is well understood among the Israelite Jews, some of whom I count among my close friends.
How about Israelis as they live in Israel.
It all goes back to Abraham, and his two sons. Isaac and Ishmael. That is the root of this conflict!
I thought the separation was about Ishmael the first born (albeit via concubine) and Isaac (born later to Sarah).
Maybe a dumb question but, When did the early settlers begin calling themselves “Americans?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.