9 of 41 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner's Guide (Paperback)
This book contains so many historical innacuracies it is hard to believe anyone can genuinely endorse it. It presents prejudice as fact and when reading it, you really do feel the pure venom and hatred of the author. Books have been written before by those motivated by some kind of poisonous obsession with a particular group of people and this is only the latest attempt by such an author to change historical fact to fit their own point of view.
A VERY poor read.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 12 Feb 2012 21:15:51 GMT
Last edited by the author on 12 Feb 2012 21:18:11 GMT
S Wood says:
Ha ha! "[S]o many historical inacuracies" and you can't bring yourself to cite one. The "poisonous obsession" is that of the pro-Israel lobby and their denial of the reality of Israels history vis-a-vis Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world.
In reply to an earlier post on 13 Feb 2012 14:35:15 GMT
How about the misquote of David Ben- Gurion. White cliams he said 'We wish, we need to expel the Arabs and take their place. When in fact what he actually said was 'We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption - proven throughout all our activity in the Land - that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.' Little bit different no?? And that's just for starters...
Posted on 22 Jun 2012 02:02:34 BDT
Amazon Customer says:
That's one (supposedly)...are there more?
In reply to an earlier post on 27 Nov 2012 16:43:43 GMT
Simon Hall says:
Actually White is quoting directly and acurately from a letter Ben Gurion wrote to his son Amos. There is a lot of debate about that letter, because the quote seems to contradict a lot of the rest of the letter, which is now in the public domain. Perhaps Ben Gurion forgot to put a 'not' in the Hebrew original, but for now it is definitely NOT there. Perhaps White would have been better off not using such a contested source, but he is technically correct.
In reply to an earlier post on 27 Nov 2012 17:03:14 GMT
Last edited by the author on 27 Nov 2012 17:07:47 GMT
S Wood says:
It may contradict the rest of the letter but certainly chimes in with historical reality. More a freudian slip than slip of the pen?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›