As for the statements about Moses 1250 etc, it is by no means accepted history but decidedly contentious. Leading Egyptian scholars doubt Moses existed as a historical personage. The word is Egyptian for "son of". There are any number of "so-and-so"moses in Egyptian history, but "son of" without a who the son is of, is unknown.
Some scholars think Israel as a distinct nation dates only from 900 BC, which is old enough to establish "3000 years" and one would think, sufficient. Established monotheism appears to date only to the return from the Babylonian captivity around 540 BC (reign of Cyrus) - pre-exile Israel was pagan-polytheist.
The claims are evidence the writer is pushing literalist claims, not present ones.
As for the statement that all western nations thought Jews deserved their own state after WW II, it is not accurate. The Brits fought against the establishment of Israel and sought to prevent emigration to colonial Palestine. Jews waged a terrorist war for independence against British troops. Britain left at the time it gave up most of its colonies - it was too poor to keep them after WW II. A UN mandate sought to divide the country but was unrealistic and unenforced. War determined the initial boundaries of the new state. The US was quick to recognize and support Israel. Britain was cool.
The 1956 war, when the Israelis were the ones doing the attacking, in concert with France and Britain, is left out. The US forced a climb down that humiliated Britain nd France. France became a patron of Israel at that time - that is where Israel got its nuclear technology for example, working with the French.
As for the statements about Arafat, yes he was an out and out terrorist from the start. A Moscow trained one. Left out of his history here is the fact that he tried to take over the kingdom of Jordan in a revolution in 1970, getting the Palestinian population of Jordan to rise against the ruling minority Hashamite tribe. That failed, with 5000 killed, and set him packing to Lebanon. Which served as his terror base until 1982 when Israel again was the one doing the invading, to smash the PLO. The US under Reagan saved the PLO diplomatically, earning truck bombings and a near war with Syria for our pains, and still bundled Arafat off to Tunisia and safety.
Arab nationalists want Israel destroyed. Islamic fundamentalists want Israel destroyed. Israel does not in the least require moldly old books to enforce its claim to live, all it needs is common sense and the bravery of its sons. No permission is needed from heaven or earth to defend oneself against implacable and unjust enemies. It is entirely normal for control of a country to rest on the right of conquest. Challenging a previous result is called war, and fully justifies the previous winner in winning again, as ruthlessly as he needs to.
As for claims to the place, it has been ruled by Eyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arab Muslims, Christian Crusaders, Turks, the British, and modern Israel. The only constant in its history is turmoil and unending strife. The only claim anyone has ever had to it is conquest. It is all they have had and all they have needed, it is all Israel has today and all it needs.
Ironically, only the Turks could control the feral behavior of the Arabs they ruled. They were not "infidels" and knew who they were dealing with.
"Jews waged a terrorist war for independence against British troops."
Huh?
What Israel waged was a true Insurgency -- they targeted the British Military not civilians. The US government, and most analysts, define terrorism as targeting civilians.
"The 1956 war, when the Israelis were the ones doing the attacking, in concert with France and Britain, is left out."
I guess by your definition the US was the one doing the attacking in Iraq. You appear to have forgiotten the numerous UN resolutions Egypt violated. Sound familiar?
"On August 9, 1949, the UN mixed armistice commission upheld Israel's complaint that egypt was illegally blocking the canal. un negotiator Ralph Bunche declared: "There should be free movement for legitimate shipping and no vestiges of the wartime blockade should be allowed to remain, as they are inconsistent with both the letter and the spirit of the armistice agreements."
On September 1, 1951, the security council ordered egypt to open the canal to Israeli shipping. egypt refused to comply.
The egyptian foreign minister, muhammad salah al-din, said early in 1954:
The arab people will not be embarrassed to declare: We shall not be satisfied except by the final obliteration of Israel from the map of the middle east (Al-Misri, April 12, 1954)."
You also must be unaware of the numerous attacks on Israel from Egyptian Fedayeen prior to 1956 and the massing of armies on Israel's borders.
"Israeli Ambassador to the un, Abba Eban, explained the provocations to the security council on October 30:
During the six years, during which this belligerency has operated in violation of the armistice agreement, there have occurred 1,843 cases of armed robbery and theft, 1,339 cases of armed clashes with egyptian armed forces, 435 cases of incursion from egyptian controlled territory, and 172 cases of sabotage perpetrated by egyptian military units and fedayeen in Israel. As a result of these actions of egyptian hostility within Israel, 364 Israelis were wounded and 101 killed. In 1956 alone, as a result of this aspect of egyptian aggression, 28 Israelis were killed and 127 wounded."
http://amichai.com/war/process/56war.html
In your mind does only the US and the West have the right to self-preservation via self-defense?