Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Myths and Facts Online:A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Jewish Virtual Library ^ | 2002 | Mitchell G. Bard

Posted on 08/24/2002 4:42:48 PM PDT by zapiks44

Myths & Facts Online
A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict

By Mitchell G. Bard




TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Free Republic; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: israel; middleeast; mythsandfacts; napalminthemorning; palestine; wot
I found this online book a few weeks ago. After reading through the whole thing I'm now more convninced than ever that Arafat will never make peace, the Arab world uses Israel (and us) as its scapegoat, and that Israel is our only true ally in the region. This is required reading for anyone who thinks Israel "occupies" and "represses" the Palestinians.

And if you dismiss it as a "Zionist" organization, most of its sources are from the mainstream press (if you consider the NY Times and Washington Post "mainstream")

1 posted on 08/24/2002 4:42:48 PM PDT by zapiks44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Good information. I believe the NY Times has its own agenda.
2 posted on 08/24/2002 4:46:59 PM PDT by bribriagain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
I feel comfortable when arguing Israel's position until we get to the questions concerning settlements. Then it gets a little fuzzy as to who is right and who is wrong (as if right and wrong really pertain to that conflict).

If you want to say Israel acquired the trans Jordan and gaza lands as a result of winning the war, that's good enough for me. But to argue who has the moral high ground in that one is, well, kinda like manifest destiny vs the injuns.

3 posted on 08/24/2002 5:05:27 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
The article you posted is mostly propaganda.

It tries to disguise the fact that Arabs have lived continuously in the land of Palestine - whether they called it that or not, whether it was an independent country or not - as the dominant culture for more than 1000 years. Whatever the faults of that culture - and we all know there are many - they preferred it to an imposed Zionist culture in which they would be the dhimmis. As early as 1891 they realized the nature of the coming conflict and tried to stem the massive Jewish immigration.

What we have is two incompatible cultures, each with good claims, fighting to control one small piece of land. It's a fight to the death - unless attitudes change far more than anyone believes possible.

Read Jabotinsky's writings, 1913-39, and Boris Shustaff (spelling?) who writes for Gamla (and others).

4 posted on 08/24/2002 5:37:01 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
What parts are propoganda?
5 posted on 08/24/2002 5:39:06 PM PDT by Iwentsouth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Since you will doubtless attract detractors, here's more for confirmation:

Why Israel Is The Victim And The Arabs Are The Indefensible Aggressors In the Middle East

The Big Lie

"The Arabs Are Responsible"

The Myth Of The Palestinian People

-Ariel Sharon & Israel-- The myths of Sabra and Shatilla and the war in Lebanon --

-Online book debunking the "Sharon Terror story--

-Israel Arabs Palestinians THE BATTLE FOR TRUTH--

-Crash Course in Middle East History--

-Setting the Historical Record Straight--

Why Europe Hates Israel

A History of Terror in Israel

Great concise explanation of 67 borders and UN res 242 here.

Islam Unveiled -Dr. Ergun Caner

A LETTER FROM ISRAEL

-"In their own words"-Translations of Arab Publications--

6 posted on 08/24/2002 5:44:01 PM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iwentsouth
I've already stated that the article tries to denigrate Arab claims and thus hide the real nature of the conflict.

Read "Israel's roots" carefully. You'll see that the author says that most of the Arab inhabitants in 1882 had arrived within the previous 70 years, then quotes someone who says the population had been static for the previous 40 years, than another who says the ancestors of the Arab population had been there for a thousand years (the author doesn't seem to notice the possible contradictions).

More important, read Jabotinsky's (Zhabotinsky's) 1923 "Wall of Iron".

7 posted on 08/24/2002 5:58:48 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: evad
If you want to say Israel acquired the trans Jordan and gaza lands as a result of winning the war, that's good enough for me. But to argue who has the moral high ground in that one is, well, kinda like manifest destiny vs the injuns.

Not quite.
The injuns were never offered the land but refused it because they wanted the whole enchilada.

The arabs did; too bad for them.
The "occupied" territories are Israeli ad so are the settlements, now.

Losers in war don't get to "change their minds".

8 posted on 08/24/2002 6:15:56 PM PDT by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Iwentsouth
What parts are propoganda?

According to liberalarry, all the parts of history that he doesn't like...

9 posted on 08/24/2002 6:17:49 PM PDT by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Losers in war don't get to "change their minds".

Of course they do!!!

They get to run to the U.N. and cry about "collective punishment", that charge, somehow, makes them the victims instead of the people they tried to kill en masse...ya gotta love the liberal press 'cause they are always looking for 'the victim de joure.

10 posted on 08/24/2002 6:23:15 PM PDT by beowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
You're a real idiot.

Too Late for a Peaceable Solution

Shusteff is the best and most knowledgeable modern writer on this subject that I've come across. This is his only article I have ready access to. Do a Google if you want to see more.

11 posted on 08/24/2002 6:52:19 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Arabs lived in "Palestine" for a thousand years?

Strange, considering that the Falistin or "Philistines" of the Old Testament weren't even Arabs but were from the Greek Islands and the Aegean Sea.

Stranger still, considering that there is no Palestinian language, no history of Palestinian art, no distinct Palestinian culture. The Palestinians, for having such a *long* history, seem to lack any history at all.

And as far as "Palestine" itself, it was invented by Rome.

12 posted on 08/24/2002 8:08:26 PM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Reactionary
The land is the land - whatever it was called.

The Philistines, a sea people, seemed to have arrived in Canaan somewhere around 1200B.C. - almost 2000 years before the Arabs. So what?

There is no Arizona language, no New York language, no Georgia language. Does that mean Americans don't live there?

Your comments make me think you haven't understood anything I've said and certainly haven't understood Shusteff.

13 posted on 08/24/2002 8:16:24 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
You're a real idiot.

Why do you find this comment necessary? It totally demeans any posible legitimate argument you may have.

14 posted on 08/24/2002 8:36:16 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Losers in war don't get to "change their minds".

I have no arguement with that...might makes right.

I was speaking of the moral high ground that one side may have vs the other...as if that really matters.

15 posted on 08/24/2002 8:39:53 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: evad
Why do you find this comment necessary?

It's an entirely appropriate reply to your self-important sarcasm.

It totally demeans any posible legitimate argument you may have

Now that's plain stupid. I would think that your interest in the subject is serious and not dependent upon your opinion of me. Thus you would make your own judgement about the value of the works or Shusteff and Zhabotinsky.

Especially the latter given that

a) He was responsible for Jewish entry into WWI on the side of the British and thus largely responsible for the Balfour Declaration
b) He created the Israeli army
c) He predicted the Holocaust and was largely responsible for saving whatever part of East European Jewry that was saved

16 posted on 08/24/2002 8:48:36 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Sorry. I meant an entirely appropriate reply to Publius' self-important sarcasm.
17 posted on 08/24/2002 8:52:31 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
The land is the land - whatever it was called.

Yes, and what was the land called before the Romans renamed it as an insult to Jews? It was called Israel. "Palestine" was the name given to Israel by Rome. Palestine, even as a Roman invention, had absolutely nothing to do with Arabs.

"There is no Arizona language, no New York language, no Georgia language. Does that mean Americans don't live there?"

Americans do live there, and since there isn't such a thing as the "Arizonian People" who lay claim to Arizona based upon some historical claim to the land, your analogy makes little sense. After all, Arizonians hardly make the claim that their history goes back 1000 years and that they have the right to Arizona based upon a *historical* claim to the land.

And the "Palestinians" don't have a historical claim to their land, either. Palestine was a Roman invention. There never has been a "Palestinian people," unless you happen to think that the ancient Filistin, who were a displaced tribe from the Aegean Sea, morphed into Arabs in the Middle Ages.

18 posted on 08/24/2002 9:05:20 PM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reactionary
The Arabs have a claim to the land. Especially those Arabs who live there, whose ancestors lived there, and whose ancestors ancestors lived there. They didn't call it Palestine. They didn't regard it as a separate country with a separate name. Our current divisions were not their divisions - anymore than current American divisions have any reference to former native American divisions.

I find it strange indeed that you would try to make the arguments you do.

19 posted on 08/24/2002 9:14:51 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
"each with good claims, fighting to control one small piece of land"

Well ... I just can't let that statement go by. Israel has the real legitimate claim. It goes back thousands of years. If you go to the Bible and read the story of Abraham and Sarah, you will find the real story.

When Abraham and Sarah were trying to have a child (the child God had promised to them), nothing was happening. After 25 years, they got tired of waiting on God and decided to take matters into their own hands.

Sarah suggested that Abraham lay with Sarah's handmaiden. He did. The child which came from that union was named Ismael. Ismael was not the son promised to Abraham. Shortly after that, Sarah became pregnant and bore Isaac. Isaac was the child of promise; the child who was to inherit the land which God had promised to Israel.

Jewish law says the "first born" inherits everything from the Father. Ismael always has believed he was the first born. Because of that, he used to bully and intimidate Isaac. Finally, Sarah got tired of it and told Abraham to put Ismael and his mother out of the camp. Abraham did.

At that time, God told Ismael's mother that he would make of Ismael a great nation. However, Ismael's followers have fallen into deception and have been led astray into the worship of the devil (and the deception is they don't know they have been led into the worship of the devil), that is why they claim it's God.

The real struggle is between the descendents of Ismael and Isaac, with Isaac being the true inheritor of the land. You are truly right about this conflict being about the land. Ismael's people want the land; they believe that Ismael is rightfully the first born of Abraham and entitled to the inheritance.

Just as an aside, I have always believed that Ismael's relationship with his mother and with Sarah is the reason for the terrible treatment of Arab women.

Oh ... and if you don't agree with me, it's okay!!
20 posted on 08/25/2002 12:09:15 AM PDT by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Wars happen, people lose land.

The 'Palestinians' supported the wrong side. They lost some property. The Arabs did it again in 1967. They lost more property.

Luckily for them, they gained much more property and wealth from the Jews of the Middle East, when they ran them out of their homes in the hundreds of thousands... and those Jews had ACTUALLY been there for thousands of years.

But no one cries for them, because they were resettled in Israel, by a sane, humane, moral, just, modern society.

The 'Palestinians' should be resettled as well, in the 99.99% of the Middle East still under the control of Arabs and Muslims.

Or they can just keep fighting for that little 0.01% they lost (and never had a right to have to begin with)... and risk losing the other 99.99% in a nuclear meltdown.

21 posted on 08/25/2002 2:32:13 AM PDT by solmar_israel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: solmar_israel
(and never had a right to have to begin with)...

On this you're wrong. On everything else you're right.

22 posted on 08/25/2002 4:00:17 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
I don't have a religious view of the world, so I am not comfortable engaging in religious disputations.

From my - admittedly secular - view the Jews claimed their God gave them the land. Other peoples never accepted that claim since the Jewish God was not theirs.

History is ambiguous in its support. For a few centuries, between 1200 and 500 B.C. Jews controlled various parts of the Holy Land - usually small parts. From sometime after Cyrus until the Roman destruction the same situation again existed - but always as dependents of larger powers.

2000 years then passed in which the Jewish people had no state of their own although they continued to live in the Holy Land in varying - usually small - numbers.

If you feel that history gives the Jews a better claim than the Arabs that's fine with me - although I must point out that logically you then feel that native Americans have a much better claim to America than Americans of other ancestry.

My view is Zhabotinsky's. Both peoples have a very strong attachment to the land. Both have lived on it for a very long period of time. But the Jews need for it is greater, their determination stronger, their power superior.

As solmar_israel suggested (a la Gandhi) the only solution to this conflict - barring a truly drastic change in attitudes - is resettling, population transfer, ethnic cleansing. That means one of the two peoples must experience a great tragedy.

23 posted on 08/25/2002 4:22:57 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Now that's plain stupid. I would think that your interest in the subject is serious and not dependent upon your opinion of me.

So now I'm stooopid.. and I have no opinion of you other than you seem unable to make a statement without some personal derogatory comment.

24 posted on 08/25/2002 9:45:13 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: evad
I have no opinion of you other than you seem unable to make a statement without some personal derogatory comment

I've made many, many comments on this and other threads. The overwhelming majority contain no personal derogatory comment.

25 posted on 08/25/2002 11:43:54 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: evad
Also, I didn't say you were stupid. I said your statement was stupid. Everyone makes such statements from time to time. Nothing wrong with calling them by their rightful name.
26 posted on 08/25/2002 12:27:20 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
peace..

you win

27 posted on 08/25/2002 3:43:11 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Everyone should read the Shusteff article at the link provided by liberallarry in #11.

Supporting Israel does not mean that you have to view history through rose-tinted glasses.

I am reminded of an article by Israeli writer Amos Oz that appeared recently in the local Jewish gazette. He recalled the armed clashes that took place in Jerusalem almost every day before Israel's independence.

Even then Oz respected the Arabs and what they were fighting for, but at the same time he knew that in this tragic situation there could be only one winner and one loser. The Jews had had to come to Palestine because they were being persecuted and killed everywhere else, the Arabs in Palestine were forced to fight so fiercely because the rest of the Arab world showed no generosity of spirit and would not resettle its Palestinian brothers and sisters so that the Jews could call a little piece of land their own.

Today Israel is half a winner and the Arabs are half a loser, but peace will not come before the Arabs see Israel as being at least as permanent as Spain, and I cannot see that happening in less than 200 years.
28 posted on 08/25/2002 11:37:11 PM PDT by tictoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
I stand by my comment.

The Arabs today have no right to Israel.

Actions have consequences. Just as Germany lost ownership of much of the land in its possession before launching WWII, so have the wars by the Arabs nullified any historic right they may have had to the land.

Launching a war of extermination, and losing, have a price.

Additionally, they have no rights to the 'disputed territories' which weren't even theirs historically. They simply moved there in the course of the 1948 war.

In fact, Judea and Samaria is the cradle of Jewish civilization, and had a continuous Jewish presence until the 1920s.

It was then that the Arabs 'revolted' (ie. slaughtered Jews) and British ethnically cleansed much of the territories of its Jewish population (relocating them to Jerusalem and else where), under the pretense of avoiding further conflict.

Cities like Hebron (which the world considers occupied Palestinian land) have actually only been Arab since the late 1920s and until Israel liberated them in 1967. They became Arab again when Israel foolishly handed them over in the course of Oslo.

29 posted on 08/26/2002 1:04:19 AM PDT by solmar_israel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: solmar_israel
While nothing you say is wrong, it isn't right either.

For 2000 years Jews yearned to return to Canaan/Palestine/Israel. It took the Christians of Spain 700 years to reconquer it. Peoples very often have a very strong attachment to "their" lands. Some wars never end.

Once again I recommend Zhabotinsky's "Wall of Iron". I'll post a link to it if I have the time.

30 posted on 08/26/2002 5:34:05 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
There was a continuous Jewish presence in Hebron for 3,000 years up until the late 1920s. This is an undisputable fact my friend.
31 posted on 08/26/2002 6:38:39 AM PDT by solmar_israel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: solmar_israel
There was a continuous Arab presence in Spain for 700 years. There's been a continuous native-American presence in this country for 10,000 years. So what?
32 posted on 08/26/2002 6:42:42 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: solmar_israel
Oh yes, there's been a continuous Arab presence in Palestine for 1300 years. Do you really want to argue that the Jews 3000 year presence completely invalidates Arab attachment to the land?
33 posted on 08/26/2002 6:55:44 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
After reading this entire thread, I am still a bit baffled by your posts, Larry. You have criticized the original post for being non-factual, or at least very biased, which is fine. However, I am unable to get a clear summary of your beliefs regarding the conflict. Would you mind summarizing them?
34 posted on 08/26/2002 6:57:49 AM PDT by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Shryke
However, I am unable to get a clear summary of your beliefs regarding the conflict

That's bad and a real blow to my pride (no sarcasm). I thought I was able to express myself clearly.

I stand with Zhabotinsky and Shusteff. Tictoc in Post #28 understood the purpose of my posts and stated it better than I could - I am sad to say.

35 posted on 08/26/2002 7:51:50 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
The blow to your pride was unintentional. I happen to agree with #28 as well. Who is the "right" in Israel means little to me - I picked my side on that conflict long ago, after staying there for several months. Makes things simple, no?
36 posted on 08/26/2002 9:08:41 AM PDT by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: evad
I feel comfortable when arguing Israel's position until we get to the questions concerning settlements.

The settlements have been built on unoccupied portions of the west bank. They were wastelands that Israel has made to blossom.

37 posted on 08/26/2002 12:24:09 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson