A book worth readinig

[rini]

Arafat being described on the cover as a "bloodthirsty terrorist with no respect for human lives, impervious to his own peoples needs & aspirations" whilst being absolutely committed to "Israel's destruction".


the book opens with a description of the establishment of the PLO in 1964 when the areas of the "West Bank" & Gaza were already under Arab rule, leaving the reader to assess what "Palestine" actually needed "liberating". At the outset the book cites on page 10 that Yasser Arafat himself does not even conform to what his "own" definition of a "Palestinian" is. This is discussed at some length but essentially reveals that Yasser Arafat (born Muhammad Abdel Rahman Abdel Rauf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini, in Cairo, Egypt on August 24 1929) had never resided in "Palestine" prior to 1947 as required in the Palestinian National Covenant "definition", or indeed at any subsequent time until his arrival in the Gaza Strip in 1994.

The author is Professor Karsh, who is at Harvard this year, is head of the Mediterranean Studies Program at Kings College, University of London. The title is "Arafat's
War: The Man & His Battle for Israeli Conquest"

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/103-6270620-0319031 or http://www.fetchbook.info/search_Efraim_Karsh/searchBy_Author.html

[bluesoul]

1. Hmm

Interesting. If only a book about Sharon would be published with such notice. Reading about his history and present actions would be just as much of worth of attention

[Lithos]

2. Not correct

Arafat is a member of the Al-Husseini family of Jerusalem which used to be one of the leading families of Palestine. He did spend much of his youth alternating, like many Arabs of privilege in Palestine, between Jerusalem and Cairo.

There is quite a bit of analogy between this and wealthy families who struck it rich in US West of the 19th Century sending their wives and kids off to the East Coast.

L-

[rini]

3. actually

that is in dispute, but most authorities I've read put him squarely as an Egyption.

[Lithos]

4. Never seen convincing argument

The only one given is he was born in Cairo which is not relevent as both his parents were Palestinian. Sort of like saying children of ex-pats are not US citizens because they were born overseas.

L-

[bluesoul]

5. Wondering

I've been always wondering why some people would so badly want to deny Arafat being a Palestinian, just because he was born in Egypt. So Americans born abroad (like Lebanon) are not Americans really? :eyes:

Does this have to do with those theories among certain people that there are NO Palestinians or Palestine as such? Just wondering

[Adalah]

8. I've never found the discussions

about Arafat's birthplace terribly compelling. Golda Meir, for example, was born in Russia and grew up in America. Shimon Peres was born in Poland. Begin in Russia. And so on. This doesn't undermine their legitimacy or Israel's, in my opinion.

[rini]

9. Americans born abroad

are born of parents who have a nation. There has never been a Palestine. Until his citizenship was revoked, he carried an Egyption passport.

If you look at his bios, he had no particular relationship with the Palestinian people. The point being he is a interloper who made his fortune on the back of a people who he has actively screwed.

IMO, he is not only a fraud, but a criminal of the worst sort. Not because of his anti-Israel stance (sure I don't like it, but many Arab leaders are anti-Israel, at least publicly) but because he is a serial killer who gets his jollies killing people who follow his lead as well as innocent Israelis and now Americans.

It's time to out him as the criminal he is.

[number6]

27. just curious

was this book published just 3 weeks ago ?

rule

"All threads must be based on material originally published no more than 3 weeks ago. The "clock" does not restart if an article is republished. Exceptions will be allowed, if based on prior approval, the moderators feel a thread is appropriate."

was an exception made ?

[Lithos]

31. LOL

You are correct and the thread will be locked. The book was published Sept. 2003 from what I saw.

L-

[ElsewheresDaughter]

6. excuse my ignorance this is my first foray in I/P ..

where was Sharon born...was he born in Israel?

[bluesoul]

7. Sharon

We was born in Palestine, 1928 ;)

[rini]

10. I love Willie!

Sharon was born in the British Mandate of Palestine which is now called Israel.

[bluesoul]

12. What

Really? The whole Palestine is now called Israel? I didn't know that. And at the time he was born it was only Palestine. There was no Israel then..

[rini]

19. It was the British Mandate

I believe a goodly portion is now Jordon.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. thank you rini

[thebigidea]

11. I'm wondering why this thread isn't locked

if someone were to post a link to amazon for some anti-Sharon book, it would be vaporized in under 20 seconds.

Honestly, now...

say I were to start a new thread called "A book worth reading" for http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1859845177/qid=1067349422/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/103-6645697-6552629?v=glance&s=books or "Sharon: An Israeli Caesar" - wouldn't it be locked ASAP?

[bluesoul]

14. Well

If there are no double standards here, obviously you could do that without any problem whatsoever ;-)

[number6]

26. locked ? I hope not

:smoke: for either thread

[number6]

28. thanx for the link bigidea

I'll check that book out .

[tinnypriv]

15. You read it?

If not, your title is false.

[Gimel]

16. Then you've read it?

How can you be sure? She didn't claim to have read it, although she may have, according to her post, she is familiar with the content.

[tinnypriv]

17. Obviously rini hasn't read it

And therefore recommending it as "worth reading" is pure crap.

"Looks like being worth reading" suffices.

[rini]

18. Mr. Ashcroft

It's NOYB!!! Since when are you my mommy?

[Resistance]

20. Efraim Karsh is an idiot

Basically he's an apologist for Israel's terrorism and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Here's a couple articles so that those of you who are honest can see where this dope is coming from ...

(actually you might make a game out of it - See how many lies and distortions you can find in the articles listed)

What Occupation? by Efraim Karsh

IN 1948, no Palestinian state was invaded or destroyed to make way for the establishment of Israel. From biblical times, when this territory was the state of the Jews, to its occupation by the British army at the end of World War I, Palestine had never existed as a distinct political entity but was rather part of one empire after another, from the Romans, to the Arabs, to the Ottomans. When the British arrived in 1917, the immediate loyalties of the area's inhabitants were parochial-to clan, tribe, village, town, or religious sect-and coexisted with their fealty to the Ottoman sultan-caliph as the religious and temporal head of the world Muslim community.

Under a League of Nations mandate explicitly meant to pave the way for the creation of a Jewish national home, the British established the notion of an independent Palestine for the first time and delineated its boundaries. In 1947, confronted with a determined Jewish struggle for independence, Britain returned the mandate to the League's successor, the United Nations, which in turn decided on November 29, 1947, to partition mandatory Palestine into two states: one Jewish, the other Arab.

It is not the 1967 occupation that led to the Palestinians' rejection of peaceful coexistence and their pursuit of violence. Palestinian terrorism started well before 1967, and continued-and intensified-after the occupation ended in all but name. Rather, what is at fault is the perduring Arab view that the creation of the Jewish state was itself an original act of "inhuman occupation" with which compromise of any final kind is beyond the realm of the possible.

Israels War, by Efraim Karsh

THE REALITY I have been sketching was keenly recognized by at least some Zionist leaders at a very early stage of the conflict. In a 1923 article entitled "The Iron Wall," Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founding father of the branch of Zionism that was the forerunner of today's Likud party, argued that Arab acquiescence in the Jewish national revival in Palestine would only follow upon the establishment of an unassailable Zionist power base-political, diplomatic, and military.

"So long as the Arabs have a glimmer of hope to get rid of us," wrote Jabotinsky in his characteristically frank tone, no smooth talking or far-reaching promises will induce them to relinquish this hope, precisely because they are not a riffraff but a living people.
Every Arab defeat, every military setback, has meant an increased acquiescence in the reality of Israel. By contrast, every perceived crack in Israel's "iron wall" has meant a revival of the old dream of destroying the state utterly.

The history of the Arab-Israeli conflict over the past century vindicates Jabotinsky's stark prognosis.

IN THE 1990's, the Oslo accords, the biggest of all cracks in the "iron wall," provided the ultimate proof of Jabotinsky's thesis.

[rini]

21. where are you teaching?

Idiot, no. You may disagree with his conclusions but neither have you refuted them. Maybe because you can't?

Even I didn't call Said and idiot. A lying hypocrit, but a very intellegent one. I respect education and though I may disagree, I do respect the learning.

[Darranar]

22. How, exactly, was Edward Said a hypocrite?

What he said concerning Orientalism was somewhat accurate.

[Resistance]

23. I don't need to refute this fool

His lunacy speaks for itself.

The guy is writing articles on Palestine titled "What Occupation?" - that enough shows any honest person that his agenda is to defend Israel's ethnic cleansing; as if there is no land theft, no demolitions of people's homes, no illegal settlements, no international law judging against Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory.

What is this idiot blind?

[Saudade]

24. Please

I would like you to explain exactly how Edward Said was a "lying hypocrite." I want to see this. I have read everything that he ever wrote, so I expect evidence for your accusation.

Get with it.

[rini]

25. ES

http://www.salon.com/books/log/1999/08/26/said/
www.secularislam.org/articles/debunking.htm

[Jack Rabbit]

30. One may disagree with the late Dr. Said

One may also disagree with his approach. However, that does not justify calling him a liar or a hypocrite. There is nothing convincing in either of these links to justify such a harsh characteriazation.

[Aidoneus]

29. Bibi-fan(rini) suggests a Jabotinsky-fan(Karsh)?

I can't muster up enough acting skills to feign surprise here.. :eyes:

I'm not a fan of tombstones and post deletions (and I've made that disruptingly clear in the last couple weeks), even for people I really dislike, but I can't help but wonder anyway why these undeniably rightwing suggestions meet such consistantly infinite tolerance.