“Nation” Writers Use a Fallacious Historical Analogy to Support their BDS Campaign
In his recent book, Palestine Betrayed, the British historian Efraim Karsh writes that rather than seek moderation and compromise, the Mufti put together “a growing number of armed gangs” that “roamed the country, attacking Jewish neighborhoods, British forces, and fellow Arabs who dared defy the anti-Jewish boycott, abstained from striking, or refused to provide the rebels with food and supplies.” When the gangs were next led by Syrian officer Fawzi Qawugji, “the gangs were organized, trained and armed,” and were able to “intensify their acts of murder, plunder and sabotage.”
The Mufti made it clear, as Hamas does today, that he would never even accept the right of the 400,000 Jews in Palestine to remain there safely. His goal, as he told the German consul in Palestine, was that “the Muslims in Palestine and elsewhere were enthusiastic about the new regime in Germany and looked forward to the spread of Fascism throughout the region.” That was the character of the leader of the Arab revolt on which Weiss and Horowitz look favorably.
But they do not have to depend on Sachar or Karsh for accurate reporting on the Arab revolt. They could, should they have wished, turned to The Nation magazine’s own editor and publisher in the years of its greatest influence — the 30s and 40s — Freda Kirchwey. Writing in a March 1948 report called “Arab Claims to Palestine Without Justification,” Kirchwey wrote that the Mufti “in 1936 again was responsible for new attacks upon the Jews of Palestine. At the same time, he caused the assassination of hundreds of prominent Arabs, including 24 leading Palestine Arabs who refused to accept his leadership.”
Moreover, she wrote, “The captured files of the German High Command in Flansburg at the war’s end reveal that the Arab riots of 1936 in Palestine were carried out by the Mufti with funds supplied by the Nazis.” When the Mufti then fled to Syria and later to Iraq, he was “directly responsible for the anti-Jewish pogrom, in which almost four hundred Jewish men, women and children were stabbed or brutally clubbed to death in the streets of Baghdad.”
In essence, in identifying the “Arab revolt” approvingly and as a precedent that informs their work today, Weiss and Horowitz are supporting a Nazi inspired terror which took place against the Jews and other Arab Palestinians who did not support the Mufti’s agenda. It’s not only chilling that American students are being subjected to distortions of American history with fallacious analogies, but also that journalists, who purport to be serious about their craft, would distort the truth about the history of boycotts and general strikes during the “Arab revolt” in Palestine.
Radosh writes “The final result of their long “struggle,” as Weiss and Horowitz call it, was 1300 casualties –197 Arabs, 80 Jews and 28 British personnel killed.”
This is quite wrong, if it relates to 1936-39.
Even Wikipedia has considerably higher figures:
According to official British figures covering the whole revolt, the army and police killed more than 2,000 Arabs in combat, 108 were hanged,[8] and 961 died because of ‘gang and terrorist activities’.[1] In an analysis of the British statistics Walid Khalidi estimates 19,792 casualties for the Arabs, with 5,032 dead: 3,832 killed by the British and 1,200 dead because of ‘terrorism’, and 14,760 wounded.[1] Over ten per cent of the adult male Palestinian Arab population between 20 and 60 was killed, wounded, imprisoned or exiled.[12] Estimates of the number of Palestinian Jews killed range from 91[13] to ‘several hundred’.[14]
BTW, that “terrorism” was the internal battle between the Husseini camp and the camp of the Nashashibis.
Why do you think that because someone who carries a card with the word “jounalist” on it is anything other than a propagandists for what ever cause they happen to support. Why do you think that journalists are some ethereal being full of honor and knowledge? There is a reason that the death of journalism has been reported and tauted now for awhile. It is because journalists do not exist. The truth is I don’t think they ever did. Somehow we have immortalized the Murrows and Cronkites of this world as if they did anything but preach what they thought should be the news and how people should view reality. Yes, the internet is the death of journalism, but not because of what journalists think. It is because people do not have to take their word for what the truth is. We are able to go on-line and find out the truth for ourselves and guess what, we are smarter than any journalist anyway. Furthermore, as far as colleges and universities, considering the youth of this nation are more adept at the internet than any of their elders, than any child on a college campus who takes what they are taught (by anyone) without question is either not very bright to begin with and/or quite frankly too inadequate to deserve a college education.
You did see their other piece that opposes it, right? I don’t agree with much in The Nation, but they do seem to air out all sides on the LEFT. In any case it should be noted that there is an “Against BDS” piece given equal weight.
http://www.thenation.com/article/against-boycott-and-divestment
At the same time the Mufti launched his violent boycott campaign in Mandate Palestine, the Nazis were boycotting and beating up Jews all over Europe.
The Nation has become a hate magazine and should be trated like any other racist magazine.
The Nation writers are historical illiterates. They simply take for granted that the professors during their university years were knowledgeable. Soft science degrees are generally not worthy of respect, and this fact should no longer be downplayed if not even outright ignored. It is very fair to describe these people as bunch of ignoramuses. This is, however, not a question usually of their I.Q., which might even be incredibly high. They are instead ill educated—and it has resulted in their adamantly believing things that are not true.
Really? I hadn’t heard that before.
Ron, it is “glean” not “gleam.” As in how Ruth gleaned in Boaz’ fields.
Mr. Thomson: Stop dismissing the extreme left as illiterate gomers,it’s a mantra that falls flat. They know exactly what they are advocating. Since Marx, they have a model to achieve their goals.
Adherence to an evil ideology and historical illiteracy often go hand in hand. Our present day lefties are generally stupid. The standards of our “best” universities have dropped considerably in the last some forty years. I seriously doubt whether the typical left-winger can read a halfway serious book. Take a look at Barack Obama. He is a poorly read and intellectually shallow man. If he among the winners—what are we to conclude about the losers?
I hold no sympathy for the ivy league smugness and arrogance, but please don’t dismiss all those folks as fraudes. My son is a graduate of Notre Dame and Harvard,and will soon enter the Marine Corps leadership training program.
Fraud is rampant in the Ivy Leagues—and this also includes Notre Dame University. The typical graduate of this well know Catholic institution normally seems like an idiot. Your son may have well earned his degrees, but we can’t take that for granted. The only exceptions are any possible hard science grades. Conservative parents are often greatly responsible for this disaster. Many looked the other way while leftie professors bribed their children with inflated grades. This was the tacit agreement: leave us alone and your kids will graduate with honors! On top of that, today’s military is committed to politically correct doctrines. Promotions are sometimes premised on how an officer eagerly embraces leftism.
Whatever merits Phil’s various writings may have, the glee and ardor with which he embraced Shlomo Sand’s thesis that the Jews were a loosely knit, diverse group of post-Palestinian people alerted me to his extreme bias.
This is what he wanted to believe so it was automatically true. Details, like the genetic research which had already been done did not enter into the equation.
He has taken a strategic stand in regard to Israel and he will stick to it come hell or high water. Specific facts don’t seem to mean that much to him.
The name “Palestine” is being used in a confusing way both by Radosh and the Commentators. The name “Palestine” comes from the change the Roman Emperor Hadrian made to the name “Judea,” after he had defeated the last Jewish rebellion under Bar Kochba, in 135 A.D. After that, “Palestine” was synonymous with “land of the Jews” and “Palestinian” with “Jew.” This is why the League of Nations gave the “Palestine Mandate” to Great Britain after World War I to be the “homeland of the Jews.”
In 1964, in Cairo, the Soviet Union and Gamal Nasser of Egypt founded the “Palestine Liberation Organization” and Soviet propaganda led to calling Arabs “Palestinians,” as if Mohammedans had been the ancient denizens of the land of the Jews.
I’ve read several attempts by so called Islamic scholars that have attempted to deny that there is any evidence of a historical presence of Jews in the land now called Israel. 5000 years of archaeology not withstanding.
Great piece, Ron It never ceases to amaze how much the writing in The Nation today recapitulates the attitudes of 1930s Berlin Jewish intellectuals.
Yep. Santayana again?
Who cares about Israel Mr. Radosh? The doltish Christians,Orthodox Catholics and Evangelical Protestants,who are mocked by you and Mr. Simon as people to be barely tolerated.
Indigo, I don’t see that type of reflexive anti-Christian bias anywhere on this site.
actually indigo, I don’t think you’re right to blame the writers on this site, but I do agree that there’s a lot of Christian-bashing going on.
the liberal Jews in my town DESPISE evangelical Christians, probably as much as they hate Hamas. as a non-liberal Jew, I’m constantly trying to make these people understand that the Christians are Israel’s best friends right now. but they don’t seem to want to hear it.
michiganruth,
Thanks for speaking the truth. I am a former evangelical Christian (now sort of an agnostic, I guess…) and like ALL evangelical Xtians I had ever known, I was very pro-Israel and pro-Jewish up until I was about 31 years old. And no, I was not pro-Israel due to some bizarre apocalyptic beliefs, as American Jews seem to believe is true of all pro-Israel Xtians. At around age 31, already an agnostic myself, I began to have much closer and more frequent contact with Jewish people than I had before, socially and at work. I then discovered how despised my family, my friends, and my former co-religionists were by so many self-proclaimed “tolerant” folk. Needless to say I was appalled. It’s never fair to indict an entire group for the behaviors and attitudes of a relatively small number of people, but I feel I have seen enough to know that this is not an isolated phenomenon — I am convinced that a substantial number (probably the majority) of American Jews do have nothing but contempt and loathing for evangelical Christians. From my perspective, I have never seen any justification for this attitude.
Result: no bigotry on my end — I still judge individuals based on their own actions, but I am a bit more cautious than I used to be. Also, and this is a shame, really: My positive opinion of Israel, although it remains, has cooled significantly. I can’t be the only person who feels this way. It’s hard to maintain good feelings about a group of people you’ve never met, when the only representatives of their group that you have met, seem to hate your guts.
I care about Israel.And im not christian.Im not even white anglo saxon either.Heck according to Leftists i should be at “war” with the white man ,but im not.You see im native american.I learned to forgive them for past transgressions that i have no control over anyways.Evil on this world knows if they can break Israel, the West will fall.There is more at stake here than just the fate of 14 million jews worldwide.Im hardly religious either.I do see things in real time ,and real perspective.Life has hit me over the head quite a few times in my lifetime.
Gee did just frame an arguement without attaching any religious connotations?(wink wink)
That there are two “ethnic” groups opposed in a “territorial” squabble is being USED by the enemies of the West. Totalitarians Red or Black, i.e.Socialist – Communist, Nazi, Arab Imperialist in Islamic clothes, whatever. Totalitarians who have not and could not win any “war” on the merits of their cases. So they use old and proven methods: terrorising or imprisoning populations,continuoue lies/propaganda from information Media,pusillanimous writers, acadenics, and politicians in the West and the UN. ADDING,as good, competent fencers do, FEINT/ distraction from the true goal of domination of the juicy prey/the WEST. Israel as a Jewish State is successful feint because of historical attitudes in the West towards Jews. Tragic that those attitudes are being so easily manipulated for the murder/suicide of the last great hope of mankind: the (Christian?) West. More tragic even is that so many Jews, adhering to some “ethical” persuasion do not seem to see or understand the ploy.
The Nation long ago, not under Freda Kirchway (?), but under Vic Navasky, became a communist rag. Their line on Israel follows the old Soviet line, as that of the self-designated “left” does.
It is mind boggling that liberals are aligned with muslims against Israel. The liberal agenda seems to have become unlinked to progress.
The more I read about the liberals insane attitudes about the Jews and Muslims, I can’t help but marvel at the ignorance they impose upon themselves. It does appear that otherwise intelligent people can convince themselves of anything if political correctness demands it.
They remind me of something our English teacher told the class when I was in junior high. “Think for yourselves”,she said, “don’t be one of those people whose method of reasoning is: I have mind made up, don’t confuse me with the facts”
the black students weren’t trying to take over the school. can we say that about msa?
I can’t read more than one or two articles in The Nation anymore – it’s just not as funny as it used to be. It’s almost as if they’re trying to be serious…
“The Nation”
That rag is still around?
I thought they went belly up when the Soviet Union collapsed.
I didn’t know if the Nation was still being published until I saw one of their editors on MSNBC. It seems that they have merged with the People’s Weekly in getting the Communist party of America some more talking points. I find their intra Party discussions with the Obama administration very enlightening.
Anything that is ‘gleaned’, argued, propogated out of Bezerkly (Berkley) California will result in condemnation. God is watching. Anti-Israel, anti-semitic attitudes are for those who are on their way to a hell on a fast track.
When was the last time that the “Nation” took serious issue with any position taken by the Communist Party?
“Anything that is ‘gleaned’, argued, propogated out of Bezerkly (Berkley) California will result in condemnation.”
I don’t know. I was born in Bezerkley and propagated out of there…and I think I’m pretty cool.
Tina Trent “Indigo, I don’t see that type of reflexive anti-Christian bias anywhere on this site.”
Correct. This site promotes the bashing of only one religion.
10. Steve “It is mind boggling that liberals are aligned with muslims against Israel.”
It is mind-boggling that rightists really believe this.
Ahhh, poor poor Joseph and his multicolored coat. Hopefully Joseph will wake up from his stupor before he becomes a victim of the one true religion. As for the alignment between Progressives and Islamists that isn’t truly an alignment. It is more like the Islamists using the tried and true Marxist playbook on the useful idiot progressive. This happens due to the PC dogma that is filtering all of the signals coming from the Islamist that they are just using the progressive to attain the worldwide caliphate. Or to bring the 12th Imam out of the well. Depending on which fairy tale you are currently beholding to.