Gingrich: Palestinians an ‘invented’ people

[konradv]

huh?

"Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich said in a cable TV interview that Palestinians are an “invented” people with no apparent right to their own state, a rejection of a decade of bipartisan U.S. foreign policy.

Gingrich calls Palestinians an "invented"; people - The Washington Post

Oh lawdy lawdy lawdy...

he finally said something i agree with.

Do you think maybe Newt knows this because he's read a history book?

Apparently he has. He certainly has his Nazi talking points down. Hitler claimed Poland wasn't a real country, either.

 

[Cowman]

Anti-Semites?

Palestinians are semitic too you god damned idiot. How the **** do you tie your shoes in the morning?

the term anti-semite has a particular usage... and it doesn't apply to arabs.. regardless of whether they are a "semitic" people. but you already know that.

It's completely ******* wrong, any way you look at it.

 

[JimBowie1958]

he finally said something i agree with.

Do you think maybe Newt knows this because he's read a history book?

Apparently he has. He certainly has his Nazi talking points down. Hitler claimed Poland wasn't a real country, either.

Gingrich is a Nazi because he doesnt agree with your stupid notions of what constitutes a nation and people?

Would appear that you are the asshole.

 

[dblack]

Do you think maybe Newt knows this because he's read a history book?

Apparently he has. He certainly has his Nazi talking points down. Hitler claimed Poland wasn't a real country, either.

Gingrich is a Nazi because he doesnt agree with your stupid notions of what constitutes a nation and people?

Would appear that you are the asshole.

I wonder if it would be possible to install a Godwin trigger that would automatically close a thread (or at least flag it noticeably) once the Nazi comparison is raised... hmmm

 

[JimBowie1958]

Gingrich: Palestinians an ‘invented’ people

What's his point?

Americans are an "invented" people, too.

So are the German people, the Italian people, the French people etc., etc., etc.

Gingrich isn't much of an historian, I think.

Cultural nations are not *invented* by anyone, dude.

They originate in an evolutionary process from other nations over a long period of time.

No one invented the cultural nations of Europe, the Americas or anywhere else.

Now some seriously inebriated people drew the boundries to much of the Third world, but that is a different subject.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Then America is an invented nation as well.

Well, of course it is, you silly *****. ALL nations are invented.

So who invented the cultural nation of Russia? and what date was that?

Then America is an invented You don't think those border lines you see on the map actually exist on the ground as a natural formation somewhere, do you?

Some borders do if they coincide with natural featurs such as rivers or watershed lines.

But borders do not define what is a German, a Frenchman or an Englishman. Language, culture, traditions, loyalties and prefered practices for daily living define nations.

Borders are just a means to reduce the confusion as to who owns what.

Then America is an invented Nations are created by some group saying, "We're going to take this chunk of land over THERE, and we're going to be our own country." And then generally, they have to beat the hell out of everyone else who wants that chunk of land.

Borders may be, but no one sat down and decided to just invent Russia.

Then America is an invented America an invented nation? What did you think the purpose of the Revolutionary War WAS?

It was to seperate our cultural group from a government representing a different cultural group thousands of miles aacross the Atlantic Ocean. But the culture as defined by attitudes, living practices, notions of what is just, convenient, honorable, effective, etc was seperated from British culture long before the Treaty of Paris made our boundries seperate.

Edit: Note I had originally attributed statements by Cecilie1200 to paperview and I want to appologize to paperview for the error, and to Cecilie1200 for the mix up also. It is now corrected.

 

[Gadawg73]

I wonder how the folks in Kansas, for example, would take to the UN coming and declaring Topeka and suburbs as the new American Indian homeland.

Sorry guys, you gotta move.

How do you suppose that would play out?

I suppose that would depend on whether or not the people who actually OWNED Kansas agreed with it. For the purposes of this analogy, that would be the United States. In the case of the formation of the state of Israel, the territory was owned by the British, I believe.

Now that you mention it, I DO seem to recall the United States arbitrarily declaring huge tracts of land as belonging to the North American aborigines without asking what anyone else thought of it. Seems like it played out pretty well, actually.

Didn't play out "pretty well actually" for the Indians.
We slaughtered them while giving them shit for land sand and rocks.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Gingrich: Palestinians an ‘invented’ people

What's his point?

Americans are an "invented" people, too.

So are the German people, the Italian people, the French people etc., etc., etc.

Gingrich isn't much of an historian, I think.

The question is not whether Palestinians are "invented people", but why a so-called presidential candidate has to make statements on anyone outside of USA being "invented people", and what developments within USA drive such a person to make such statements.

Do you know the context of his remarks?

Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are 'an invented' people [video] - latimes.com

Referring back to the early 20th century, when the British government, in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, declared its support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” Gingrich suggested that at the time, the occupants of that territory – the Palestinians – did not have a legitimate claim to the land.

“I believe that the commitments that were made at the time – remember, there was no Palestine as a state,” Gingrich said. “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. And they had a chance to go many places.”

Gingrich was speaking of sovereign rights, which at the time belonged to the Ottoman Empire, until WW1 ended. He was not speaking of private property rights or anything else but rights of national sovereignty.

The Arab people in Palestine were not that many at the time, but huge numbers emigrated to Palestine in reaction to Jewish emigration after the first World War and the second (more the second than the first).

The only thing about his statement that I disagree with is the notion that an international greement can justify stripping the right to sovereignty from a group of people, no matter what their culture is. The Arabs of Palestine lost that right when they attacked the Jewish community in 1948, IMO. Then it became a toss up for the game of war to decide.

 

[Katzndogz]

America was settled by foreigners.
Australia was settled by foreigners
Palestine is settled by foreigners. The existing population objects to rocket attacks and murder.

France, England, Italy, Russia, China, and many others weren't settled by anyone. They are still home to indigenous populations.

 

[Gadawg73]

The Arab and Persian world hates Palestinians. They are on the bottom of the totem pole in the middle east. The Isrealis have done more for them than any other middle eastern nation. What other country in the middle east is a secular democracy?
Palestinians have been massacred in almost every Arab and Persian country for centuries but that is okay but when the Jews defend themselves that is a "massacre".
Kill all those that slaughter women and children while commanding their "military" from schools, hospitals, mosques and residential areas and let Allah sort them out.

There's no shortage of fascists and racists in Israel today regardless of the secular democracy that once existed there.

"Hillary Clinton had not yet finished voicing her concern about what is happening in Israel before that industrious Knesset member from the Likud, Danny Danon, started rattling off another version of the list of bills about loyalty to the state (which have meanwhile been dropped ): "Every certificate issued by the state will oblige [the recipient] to sign a document with a clause declaring loyalty to the State of Israel."

"An explanation was offered by Arutz Sheva, the settlers' news website: No declaration - then no driver's license, no identity card, no passport. Speaking to Razi Barka'i on Army Radio, Danon explained that this was indeed not enough for - watch out! - "the total solution." Even Barka'i almost choked at the phrase."

In Israel, 'fascist' is not a rude word - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

You left out religous fanatics. Name a country that does not have any of those and the 2 you stated.
Goes with the territory. The government of Israel is the most stable, secular and democratic in the region.\
Now let us take a look at the Palestinian "leaders".
Disagree with them? OK, take a look at what happens when someone does that.
They are shot in the head if they are lucky. Most get that and their extended family is also killed.
Great folks those Palestinians are.

 

[georgephillip]

"Racism develops in order to reinforce and expand excess rights - over ownership of the land (which was, and is still being, stolen from the Palestinians ), higher water consumption, high-quality construction, allowances from the state revenue, social services, chances of finding work and studies, and salary gaps. That is why a bill of this kind stands a good chance. The Jews will profit from it."

You're a couple of decades behind if you think Israel is democratic or secular unless your comparison is to Burma or Bahrain.

In Israel, 'fascist' is not a rude word - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

 

[whitehall]

Newt was right.

 

[skookerasbil]

"Racism develops in order to reinforce and expand excess rights - over ownership of the land (which was, and is still being, stolen from the Palestinians ), higher water consumption, high-quality construction, allowances from the state revenue, social services, chances of finding work and studies, and salary gaps. That is why a bill of this kind stands a good chance. The Jews will profit from it."

You're a couple of decades behind if you think Israel is democratic or secular unless your comparison is to Burma or Bahrain.

In Israel, 'fascist' is not a rude word - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Perhaps more than any other issue.........it is this one that connects the far left with the phrase DISNEY. The level of disconnect is fascinating.........it really is. This is not a cognitive fcukk-up.......its a thought processing fcukk up = definately a mental disorder. As applied to this issue, when a whole people has a mindset that another group of people have no right to EXIST and it doesnt register AT ALL with a third party.........THATS a mental disorder. Its that simple. The fringe left has zero ability to comprehend the concept of necessary tradeoffs = a brain fcukk up.

 

[The T]

Newt was right.

He is 100% correct.

 

[Katzndogz]

The arab countries hate and fear the palestinians. Syria has had a refugee camp on their border for decades and won't allow them in.

The palestiinian CAUSE is a rallying point for arabs to unite against the Jews in making demands on the west.

What would happen if the palestinians were successful in driving out the Jews and making a fully palestinian state is the bordering nations would immediately move to get their land back. Palestine would become another Kashmir, disputed territory.

 

[JimBowie1958]

America was settled by foreigners.
Australia was settled by foreigners
Palestine is settled by foreigners. The existing population objects to rocket attacks and murder.

France, England, Italy, Russia, China, and many others weren't settled by anyone. They are still home to indigenous populations.

LOL, France, England, Italy, Russia, China and every other nation on this planet was at one time or another occupied by other groups that the current inhabitants later drove them away and took that land.

There is not one nation on this planet that can claim to be 'indigenous' over a time span covering all of human history.

'Indigenous' is merely a PC way of saying 'the good guys the racist bastard whites came and killed and stole their shit'.

In fact it is a total myth.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The arab countries hate and fear the palestinians. Syria has had a refugee camp on their border for decades and won't allow them in.

The palestiinian CAUSE is a rallying point for arabs to unite against the Jews in making demands on the west.

What would happen if the palestinians were successful in driving out the Jews and making a fully palestinian state is the bordering nations would immediately move to get their land back. Palestine would become another Kashmir, disputed territory.

The Palestinian Arabs *became* hated and feard because they got into a long term war of terror against Isreal and that brought unwelcome events on thos that harbored them from time to time.

Prior to 1948, Palestinian Arabs were just another group of Arabs seperated by the boundries of European colonial powers.

As to what if the Palestinians won, well, I am afraid that by the end of this century Isreal, if it still exists, will be majority Arab, and no longer a Jewish state, but more secular like most European countries.

I am not sure that would be an insufferable condition as long as Jews are not discriminated against, but that seems to be unlikely to coincide with Arab majority status.

 

[Katzndogz]

OH yes a secular state. Like the other arab countries.

Democracy will prevent arab countries from becoming secular states.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I wonder how the folks in Kansas, for example, would take to the UN coming and declaring Topeka and suburbs as the new American Indian homeland.

Sorry guys, you gotta move.

How do you suppose that would play out?

I suppose that would depend on whether or not the people who actually OWNED Kansas agreed with it. For the purposes of this analogy, that would be the United States. In the case of the formation of the state of Israel, the territory was owned by the British, I believe.

Now that you mention it, I DO seem to recall the United States arbitrarily declaring huge tracts of land as belonging to the North American aborigines without asking what anyone else thought of it. Seems like it played out pretty well, actually.

Didn't play out "pretty well actually" for the Indians.
We slaughtered them while giving them shit for land sand and rocks.

That last line is PC myth and a slander on a lot of good people who I doubt you would have dared to say that to their face were they here.

 

[Full-Auto]

I suppose that would depend on whether or not the people who actually OWNED Kansas agreed with it. For the purposes of this analogy, that would be the United States. In the case of the formation of the state of Israel, the territory was owned by the British, I believe.

Now that you mention it, I DO seem to recall the United States arbitrarily declaring huge tracts of land as belonging to the North American aborigines without asking what anyone else thought of it. Seems like it played out pretty well, actually.

Didn't play out "pretty well actually" for the Indians.
We slaughtered them while giving them shit for land sand and rocks.

That last line is PC myth and a slander on a lot of good people who I doubt you would have dared to say that to their face were they here.

PC Myth?

You mean those infected blankets werent infected?

The badlands are fertile?