Fabricating Israeli history: the "new historians"
Frank Cass, 1997 - 210 עמודים
Israeli historiography has long been subjected to a sustained assault by self-styled 'new historians', vying to expose what they claim to be the distorted Zionist narrative of Israeli history and the Arab-Israeli conflict. They have cast Israel as the regional villain, bearing sole responsibility for the cycle of violence in the Middle East since 1946.
Fabricating Israeli History takes issue with these 'revisionists'. Through careful examination of the documentation that they have used, as well as of sources that the author believes they have either ignored or failed to trace, this book propounds that the historical facts tell a completely different story from the one they propagate. He suggests that, for the most part, the 'new historiography' has involved foul play. Numerous examples are studies in depth to illustrate the author's argument.
This is a thoroughly researched and detailed expose that will shock genuine students of history, politics and Middle Eastern affairs.
תוצאות 1-3 מתוך 15
In Shlaim's view, 'the two meetings in Shuneh were useful in identifying at least
some common ground between Abdullah and the Zionists and in providing a
basis for future cooperation between them'.21 A year later, on 21 August 1947,
THE ABDULLAH-MEIR MEETING: THE DANIN-SASSON REPORTS Having
established these two methodological flaws in Shlaim's thesis, let the two Zionist
accounts of the meeting used by Shlaim - the reports of Ezra Danin and Eliyahu ...
In Danin's words: 'We explained that our matter was being discussed at the UN,
that we hoped that it would be decided there to establish two states, one Jewish
and one Arab, and that we wished to speak now about an agreement with him [