Gingrich – His Anti-Palestinian Stance Buttresses Native American Claims To The United States!

That’s pure Gingo, speaking about his superior brand of courage. His courage to “tell the truth.”  In this case, his truth-telling was about the Palestinians, as in “Palestinians are an invented people.” That’s the wildly irresponsible statement he made a few days before during a Jewish Channel interview. Last night at the circus called the GOP Presidential debate in Iowa, he added to his assertion, “The fact is, the Palestinian claim to a right of return is based on a historically false story,” and “‘Palestinian’ did not become a common term until after 1977.” 

Well, this is classic Gingrich. The self-praising historian. Here he conflates two statements to cater to an Iowa GOP voter who is primarily an evangelical or Millennial Christian. They believe in Israel. Israel, the land of Jesus, is their foundational history and theology: so “Palestinians” do not exist, except as a terrorist force seeking to claim Israel.

The real historical scholars, of course, differ in their conceptions of both “Palestine” and “Israel.” Their differences are valid. The history of the eastern Mediterranean is wide and deep. Much must be inferred from scattered and often unreliable ancient histories as politically motivated then as they are today. 

As for Gingo’s “history,” he has great audacity when he presents the history of that area to be his history.  He is such an oversized personality, thanks primarily to his wrongdoing, that he gets very little push-back among his GOP panelists. Bachmann, the exception in all things, made a good run at him, but ultimately, she’s Bachmann who no one takes seriously at this point in the race. So after brushing off a raid by Romney, Gingo was able to emerge a virtually non-contested winner in a one-sided history contest.

Gingo’s history conforms to many scholarly influences. As an example, Dr. Yohai Sela, Assistant researcher at The Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies – Tel Aviv University, wrote this:

the Lebanese as he does about the “invented people” of Palestine. For God’s sake, Aristotle wrote of Palestine in the 4th Century B.C.E.!  So, Newt is speaking of “Palestine” as the original Jewish state. The consequences of that belief, however, would seem to lead to the equal claim that both Jordanians and Lebanese are “invented” people too. So then, are Jordan and Lebanon the property of Israel as well? Aren’t they too “invented” countries? Those questions arise as a logical result of Gingo’s incontrovertible “history.”

We’ll take Manna-hatta!

Moreover, by analogy, Gingo unwittingly provides Native Americans a valid legal claim on the territory called the United States. He simply just says anything without consideration of the general consequences of a particular statement.

For example, I grew up on Long Island, that huge finger pointing away from New York City. Well, in the same way that Professor Sela claims the word “Palestine” is of Jewish origin, the word Manna-hatta, Massapequa (as in today’s Massapequa Parkway), and Montauk Point (Long Island’s easternmost point) have no meaning in English. Twenty four of our states claim their names from Native peoples’ languages, among them Ohio, Alabama, Massachusetts, Illinois, and the very next GOP primary state, Iowa.  So, a la Gingo (and Professor Sela), have we an English language meaning for an Alabaman, Wisconsinite, or an Iowan?

The Native peoples of our country were forcibly pushed off what was collectively their land for thousands of years before. Through Gingo’s exacting history and his oft-claimed political and philosophical consistency, it follows, “Americans are an invented people.” We better get our bags packed. 

But, no fear Newt, born Newton Leroy McPherson, you’ll soon be back in Scotland among your homies, although there’s no Scottish word for “Gingo.”