The Full Monty

Much discussion has been caused by a recent article in the London Review of Books (available here with footnotes, batteries not included), which attacks the evil Israel Lobby, and regurgitates virtually every anti-Israel canard currently on the market, accepting them hook, line and sinker. This article is the most extensive and thorough piece of anti-Israel propaganda now available online, one so full of BS that it would take a week with a full team of experts to completely rebut it. On the other hand, the article also presents an opportunity. Its very thoroughness presents Israel's defenders with a chance to come face to face with the entire laundry-list of charges and rip them to shreds.

Where would one start though? How's about the regurgitated libel that Israel massacred hundreds of Egyptian POW's in '67. This charge was originally brought by James Bamford who allegged that Israel bombed the USS Liberty to cover up the crime. It was rebutted years ago by Dr. Michael Oren in the New Republic, who showed that Bamford's "evidence" was no such thing. The authors merely bring Bamford's evidence, blissfully unaware of the rebuttal.

What about the contention that the only argument regarding the Palestinian Refugee Problem is not whether it what ethnic cleansing - they claim it was - but rather, it is whether it was born by war or design? This statement is a repetition of our good friend Norman Finkelstein's claim that there is a consensus that the Paslestinian Refugee Problem was caused by Israel 'ethnically cleansing' them. [He claims to rely on 'leading scholars' such as Morris, Kimmerling and Pappe. Kimmerling is a sociologist, not an historian, and is known for his anti-Israel views. Pappe is about as objective and reliable as, well, Norman Finkelstein. Pappe is hardly a 'leading scholar' nowadays. Not only has his reputation been tarnished over the Tantura affair, his 'History of Modern Palestine' was destroyed for stupid and elementary factual errors. Even scholars sympathetic to his viewpoint such as Stephen Howe and Charles Smith, had to point out such blunders as the claim that Deir Yassin is near Haifa (it's near Jerusalem).]

The only 'concensus' exists in the fertile minds of Finkelstein, Walt & Co. Many prominent historians of the relevant period - Joseph Heller, Yoav Gelber, Anita Shapira, Mordechai Bar-On, Efraim Karsh and others have disputed many of Morris' arguments, especially when it comes to his belief that 'transfer' was a central part of Zionist thinking during 1937-1948. Prof. Alon Kadish and Prof. Avraham Sela (Hebrew University) recently disputed Morris' claim of a massacre and premeditated expulsion in Lydda in the Middle East Journal. Of course, since most of this debate takes place in Hebrew-Language and 'Zionist' journals such as Zion and Cathedra, or by evil 'Zionists', we can forgive these 'Israel Experts' from failing to actually read what non-fringe historians say. BTW, I actually read Morris' revised book, not just his much-publicized interviews, and nowhere did I find a statement that an 'ethnic cleansing' had taken place.

I hope this helps contribute to the thorough demolition of these libels. Readers are invited to add more in the Comments Box or in other forums.