Vin Suprynowicz

I was pretty sure by the time I went to bed Monday night — even though not a single ballot had been counted — that Bibi Netanyahu was on his way to another historic victory in the Israeli elections.

As now appears to have happened — the two major parties either tied at 35 seats or one seat apart, but with multiple major news organizations reporting Netanyahu is the one with the “clear path” to form a (supposedly “right-wing”) coalition government.

What was my secret source of information?

No secret. I just read the Associated Press, where AP Jerusalem Correspondent (and pro-Arab Brown University graduate) Isabel DeBre reported Sunday and Monday that the race was “too close to call.” Because the aging, out-of-step Netanyahu — who’s “under investigation” by his own Leftist Deep State — was dependent on a “religious, working-class political base,” the . . . (wait for it) . . . “walls were closing in” on the 10-year prime minister, Miss DeBre informed us.

(Yes, she actually wrote that. That the “walls were closing in.” Gee, where have we heard THAT before? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLEchPZm318 .)

The Far Left hates war hero Benjamin Netanyahu because he stands in the way of the so-called “three-state” solution to the gang of largely unemployed terrorist welfare cases who for 70 years now have clustered around Israel’s Eastern and Southern borders, sneaking in to murder schoolchildren and blow up pizza parlors and (once the Israelis got smart and built a WALL) more recently lobbing in deadly rockets and even explosives attached to helium balloons (purchased with donations intended to fund schools and hospitals) — the great-grandchildren of the Palestinian Arabs who fled Israel at its birth in 1948, counting on the massed armies of the Arab states to drive the Jews into the sea “real soon.”

Which, um, . . . didn’t work out.

(“Vin, Vin, for heaven’s sake get it straight; It’s the TWO-state Solution, buddy, the TWO-state solution.”)

No. In 1948, the British divided their “protectorate” of Palestine into two parts. (Let us skip over for now the nearly endless problems caused by “national borders” having been drawn up with a straight-edge at chart tables at the British Admiralty, setting many mutually hostile tribes to share and thus inevitably to war for control over any given African or Middle Eastern “nation-state,” while somehow forgetting “Kurdistan,” entirely.)

The Palestinian Arabs got the larger part, the nation-state then called “Trans-Jordan,” while the Palestinian Jews got the smaller part, then a largely unproductive desert, to be called “Israel.”

It’s not the fault of the Israelis that the Palestinian Arabs chose to be ruled by a Hashemite king in what is now “Jordan,” nor that said king threw out their most radical, violent, murderous thugs after they staged an unsuccessful coup attempt in 1972.

The Leftist proposal now is to give the grandchildren of those thugs their own, very odd, non-contiguous “state” in Gaza and the West Bank of the Jordan (those always work out so well; see “Danzig”) — a “third state” newly carved out of the old Protectorate of Palestine. From which they can wage eternal war on Israel.

Bibi Netanyahu isn’t going for it. And — as of Tuesday night — it appears the Israeli electorate isn’t, either.

For 70 years, they listened to the siren song of “land for peace.” Again and again they gave up land hard-won at the cost of much blood and many tears. But all who survive have to learn eventually. Now comes the counteroffer: “Start by giving us peace. Then we’ll think about the ‘land’ part.”