In October 1974, at Rabat, the Arab League made public what Algiers had settled privately a year earlier: the PLO was the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. King Hussein, who had ruled the West Bank for nineteen years, signed away his claim. The world filed this under inter-Arab politics. It was not that. It was a decision about which war to fight, and it changed the course of Western history.
Between 1948 and 1973 Five wars had produced a conclusion Cairo and Damascus reached before Jerusalem did: armies would not do it. State against state, the Arab world had the numbers, the Soviet arsenal, the depth and the oil, and it had lost every time. What could not be won on the map of states could be won on the older map —the terrain of the Arabs of Palestine themselves.
Gideon Hausner, the prosecutor of Eichmann, saw it in a cabinet session in May 1974, five months before Rabat: the Arabs were moving from a paradigm of national majorities to one of Palestinian minority terror backed by Arab states, he proclaimed.
And on that terrain the polarity reversed. No longer tens of thousands of Jews under an almost pacifist leadership, butchered periodically by hundreds of thousands of Arabs as was in the 30s , but rather, three million Jews ringed by Soviet-armed armies, living among two hundred million Arabs, presented to the world as the oppressor of a defenseless minority of 1.5 million.
The fact that Israel made an attempt to establish Palestinian statehood right after the six Day War in 1968 didn't really matter.
After all, the idea of a separate Jewish State remained unacceptable to any of the Palestinian leaders.
The PLO pivot of rabat worked immediately. Sweden, France, found common ground with Romania and the Soviet Union in their recognizing of the PLO.
It wasn't only the Arab oil that made social Democratic Western Europe drink the PLO Kool-Aid and disregard the Israeli Peace initiatives, in its entirety by 1978.
It was also the fact that Auschwitz had created an asymmetry no European nation could discharge or tolerate indefinitely.
The new PLO frame Sadat, Asad and the Soviets where pushing dissolved Western and Central Europe: if the Jews are oppressors, the debt is not permanent but accidental, and the creditor turns out no better than the debtor.
This is why the Nazi comparison recurs and why no amount of proportion kills it. It is not rhetorical excess. It is the mechanism.
That partition was offered in 1937 and refused, offered in 1947, 1968, and answered with wars of annihilation, that statehood was offered again in 2000 and in 2008 and refused without counterproposal, none of it is contested, and none of it mattered, because the frame was never built to survive contact with the record.
In fact, the question of Palestine was never even about Palestine.
The deepest function of the 1974 pivot was not inversion. It was misdirection, performed three times on the same stage, starting in Palestine and ending in London.
First, the original.
The Palestinian question drew the eye from the fact that a bloc of two hundred million, with the territory and arsenals of a continent, sought the elimination of the Jews.
Look here, at the checkpoint; you will not look there, at the order of battle.
Look here at the poverty of the believing migrant, you will not see sharia law.
Second, on the Palestinians themselves. Once their question was the whole subject, it drew the eye from what their movement had professed since its national founding in 1921. Fatah, the Popular Front, and later Hamas, each official wing, secular or religious, committed to Israel's destruction as constitutnal purpose.
Third, Europe. The cause draws the eye from the political aspirations of Muslim minorities in European societies "Dawa", and simultaneously arms them with a cause for grievance.
Against Israel it is pressed in the language of Mercy. Against Europe, in the language of Justice.
The same instrument on two fronts, working on both because each audience hears only its own vocabulary, the most effective entry vector Islam has found is to create a Jewish demon that persecutes him. By that it enters into the wealthy democracies.
Palestine as the flagship of post colonialism, be it funded by Gulf States or theorized by French communists, became such a useful tool post 1974, it helped make the changing of European demographics palatable and more vivid than the idea of a Palestinian state which the Palestinians have been rejecting for 90 years
Only white Americans or Europeans who have no understanding of Dawa and Jihad don't understand that Jerusalem is a pretext for a larger story. And a Palestine that is free is useless as a Berlin that is Christian.
The European intellectuals are not sophisticated enough to understand the basis of the logic of an Arab Bedouin.
A true noble savage who knows that the never finished hate of one eternal "other" (Jew), can turn the hater into the new "other" of the Muslim in his own land (the Christian).
It's the Auschwitzisation of Palestine in the name of the victims who call death to the Jews, that will only be finished once Paris is Muslim in order to free this Palestine.
I am not saying that Europe becoming Muslim is bad, I'm saying for Muslims it's mor important than Palestine at this stage.
I'm saying if the Arab states can build Palestine as a political entity between 1964-1974, to usher a new method of war against the state of Israel,
Arab minorities in the west can also turn the war against the state of Israel in the name of Palestine, to a war of reconquest against the very parts of the west who despise Israel. They will even get Chinese and Russian help for it. And it's working.
Because the Europeans are honestly haters (of Jews).
So let's admit that Palestine is actually a slogan that is used against one type of infidel to erode his standingin daar el Harbm (land awaiting Muslim rule).
In a party session in 1976, Shimon Peres put it in three sentences no one thought worth remembering: the Arab world is incapable of being a majority and incapable of being a minority. As a majority it persecutes its minorities; as a minority it sets out to make the majority into one.
He was talking about the Middle East. Walk through London and see what he was actually describing.
And you'll learn Palestine was never about Zionism, it was about using Jews as scapegoats to take over the West from within.
Only a narrow minded infidel will think this to be islamophobic.
This is a reenactment of the treaty of al-Hudaybiya, the Hobbsian political maxim of all Islam since 628 AD.
