When current “I’m not Mitt Romney” Republican Presidential frontrunner Newt Gingrich isn’t demanding we return to a Dickensian Child Work Model, he’s making some profoundly inaccurate and frighteningly daft comments on foreign policy. Due to a complete and utter dearth in intellectual curiosity, Newt Gingrich is considered by many to be the thoughtful Republican in the group (like Limbaugh being the thinnest one at fat camp). But even if he is the most seasoned politician and given to wonky introspection, that certainly doesn’t stop the Newtster from suggesting horrific solutions to child poverty or thorny international issues.
// ]]>
In an interview with The Jewish Channel, Newt Gingrich called the Palestinians an “invented” people and suggested they have “no right to a state of their own.”
“I believe that the Jewish people have a right to a state,”Gingrich told the interviewer. “Remember, there was no Palestine existing as a state. Part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs … and they had a chance to go many places. And for a variety of political reasons, we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s.”
But of course! I suppose Australia’s aborigines and New Zealand’s Maoris are just total figments of out imagination, and obviously the Native Americans are also made up liberal media propaganda. Perhaps he’s eating “Figment Newton” cookies.
Not surprisingly, Newt’s ludicrous revisionism runs counter to the US’s official designation and recognition of Palestine as being entitled to statehood. A majority of historians (REAL historians) quickly point out that the inception of Palestinian Arab nationalist sentiment occurred 1834, when Arab residents of the Palestinian region revolted against Ottoman rule. Anyone with a crude understanding of Palestine-Israeli history knows that Israel, founded amid the tumultuous 1948 Arab-Israel conflict, was created along the lines of a 1947 U.N. plan for ethnic partition of the then-British ruled territory of Palestine which Arabs rejected outright. Also known as the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, the accord was designed to replace the British Mandate for Palestine with “Independent Arab and Jewish States” and a “Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem” administered by the UN.
Gingrich, although a recent Catholic convert (more divorces), is a subscriber of Pat Robertson’s horrendously misinformed Pro-Zionist “Israelis are the chosen people” balderdash. It’s palpably obvious that Gingrich, ever the sleazy lobbyist, is looking to score political brownie points with AIPAC and the chickensh#t hawk neocon establishment over at the Heritage Foundation in his radically anti-Palestine rhetoric. Saying Hamas has “an enormous desire to destroy Israel,” it’s clear that Gingrich is following the Republican presidential candidate foreign policy script to a T.
Michael is a comedian/VO artist/Columnist extraordinaire, who co-wrote an award-nominated comedy, wrote for NY Times Laugh Lines, guest-blogged for Joe Biden, and writes a column for MSNBC.com affiliated Cagle. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. Seriously, follow him or he’ll send you a photo of Rush Limbaugh bending over in a thong.
3 comments for “Gingrich Thinks Palestinians Are ‘Invented’ People And ‘Should Not Exist’ (VIDEO)”
Rick
December 13, 2011 at 3:31 am
In the interest of historical accuracy, in a sense Gingrich is right.
Palestine is a geographical area. It was never an independent state. The term Palestinian could be used to describe anyone living in that region, but it was NOT so used by the Arab population untill 1920 or so. Even well after that time Pan-Arab nationalism was the leading ideology.
That being said, it does nothing to lessen the truth of a group of people coming to discover common interests and heritage and deciding to consider themselves a People. There may not in fact have been a Palestinian nation before 1920, but there certainly is now, and that’s a fact we (and Gingrich) must accept.
Regardless of ones views on this issue I think Romney was right that this isn’t helpful. Newt is still a pundit type at heart. He’s not cut out for the job of president. He’s mellowed in recent years but he’s still Newt.
In the interest of historical accuracy, in a sense Gingrich is right.
Palestine is a geographical area. It was never an independent state. The term Palestinian could be used to describe anyone living in that region, but it was NOT so used by the Arab population untill 1920 or so. Even well after that time Pan-Arab nationalism was the leading ideology.
That being said, it does nothing to lessen the truth of a group of people coming to discover common interests and heritage and deciding to consider themselves a People. There may not in fact have been a Palestinian nation before 1920, but there certainly is now, and that’s a fact we (and Gingrich) must accept.
“… and they had a chance to go many places.”
??
Regardless of ones views on this issue I think Romney was right that this isn’t helpful. Newt is still a pundit type at heart. He’s not cut out for the job of president. He’s mellowed in recent years but he’s still Newt.
Newt has his kneepads ready for all potential voting blocks…