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 27
This was the time and the place for the Foreign Secretary to inform his colleagues
of such an important matter as the (alleged) Hashemite-Jewish agreement of
November 1947, and to seek advice for his imminent meeting with Abul Huda; yet
Yet 'he still thought that, if in the end partition proved a failure, they would have to
go back to the "Bevin Plan'".68 As late as 19 April 1948, less than a month before
the completion of the British withdrawal from Palestine, the Foreign Secretary ...
That Attlee was as prejudiced as Bevin does not detract one iota from the Foreign
Secretary ' s bigotry; the only difference between them is that Bevin 'did not guard
his mouth when angered' while Attlee was careful not to give public airing to ...