COLUMN: 'Palestinian' heritage?

From Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96 From Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The Romans gave present-From Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The Romans gave present-day Israel the name ofFrom Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The Romans gave present-day Israel the name ofPalestine. Arabs have noFrom Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The Romans gave present-day Israel the name ofPalestine. Arabs have nohistoric claim to the land. From Dave Crystal's, "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The Romans gave present-day Israel the name ofPalestine. Arabs have nohistoric claim to the land. Once again, my detractors have illustrated so neatly why they are a blot on the intellectual integrity of the Ivy League. In response to my last column concerning the repression of civil liberties being perpetrated by Israel's Labor party, one Arab letter writer decided to respond, incorporating into his rebuttal the belief that Israel is historically "Palestinian" land, and that the Palestine Liberation Organization is not a terrorist organization. If this writer's views are echoed by others, then I am abashed that there are students at this university who believe such utterly fallacious and anti-Semitic propaganda. Let's set the record straight once and for all: Israel is the homeland of the Jewish race, and of the Jewish race only. In reality, there never was a historic "Palestinian" nation, and never in history has there been a state of Palestine. Up until the establishment of the State of Israel, the term "Palestinian" was used to designate any resident of the land of Palestine/Israel. The British mandate of Palestine is a prime example of the above truth. All residents of the mandate to whom the British issued identity papers and passports were referred to as "Palestinians" in these documents. For example, had Shimon Peres traveled from Dimona to Denver in the 1930s, he would have had to show an American customs officer a passport that labeled him "Palestinian." So too, Yitzchak Rabin and Hanah Senesh were Palestinians. In contrast to the Jews, the Arab residents of the mandate rejected the designation "Palestinian," claiming that they were part of the greater Arab world and should only be referred to as "Arabs." Some of them even viewed themselves as southern Syrians (one should note that Syria considers its manifest destiny to extend to the Gulf of Aqaba). It is obvious that the social construction and creation of a Palestinian national identity serves as the Arab world's most potent weapon in its struggle to wipe Israel off the map of the Middle East. The masses of this world who are too ignorant and shallow-minded to know the important details of Jewish history have come to believe that the "Palestinians" are the aboriginal inhabitants of Palestine/Israel, who have been persecuted by the Jews who stole their land. This new world view of the Middle East has led to the global community's increasingly hard-line stance and demands for territorial concessions from Israel. Despite the fact that Israel has already given up over two-thirds of the land she once possessed, the world continues to demand more from her. The end result is the Arabs' dream come true: a weakened Israel and a divided Jewish community. The Arabs already have 21 countries of their own. The question of why they need a 22nd, in place of the sole Jewish state, can only be answered by their not-so-hidden agenda. As far as the PLO is concerned, anyone proposing that it is not historically a terrorist organization is either disillusioned or shares in this not-so-hidden agenda. Anyone suggesting that the PLO is an instrument of peace should ask himself what constitutes terrorism. Does bombing a Pan-Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland constitute terrorism, or does killing 11 Jewish Olympians at the 1972 Munich games? Does hijacking dozens of planes worldwide constitute terrorism, or does bombing Israeli embassies in Argentina? Does killing 21 Jewish school children in the Israeli town of Ma'alot constitute terrorism, or does hijacking the Italian Achille Lauro cruise ship? Whether one values Jewish lives or not, one must admit that the PLO is a terrorist organization. For those who argue that it is no longer terrorist because it is engaged in peace talks with Israel, I pose the following question: If Charles Manson were to conduct peace talks with the families of his victims, would that negate the fact that he murdered them? Once a murderer, always a murderer. Once a terrorist organization, always a terrorist organization. Furthermore, even in the peace talks, the PLO has yet to prove itself a partner in peace. First and most importantly, after two-and-a-half years of Israeli concessions, the PLO has yet to revoke its charter calling for Israel's destruction. Second, there are isolated instances that point to Yasser Arafat's true intentions. For example, tapes have leaked out, recorded by the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, that show Arafat corroborating with Hamas leaders in August 1995, planning a bus bombing. Then, on August 21, 1995, a "Palestinian" suicide bomber blew up a Jerusalem bus, killing four Israeli Jews and one American. More recently, it has been reported in a Norwegian newspaper that Arafat met with Arab officials in Norway explaining to them how he plans to bring about the destruction of Israel through "psychological warfare." There was no "Palestinian people" present in Israel at the time the Jewish state was created. If one looks at New York Times stories from the 1940s and '50s, all racial conflicts in the land that is now Israel are described as occurring between Arabs and Jews. Nowhere is the term "Palestinian" mentioned. In fact, the first reference at all to a "Palestinian people" is in the United Nations yearbook from 1961. As far as the peace process is concerned, we are giving Arabs historically Jewish land in return for "peace," not because they have any valid historic claims to it.