|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:56, you wrote: > ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml > > > In a message dated 4/13/2004 9:46:05 AM Central Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Dr. Tezza: Are you aware that the Peters book has been reviewed and > discredited by more than one critic, including some who would love to > agree with her. She has been exceedingly sloppy with her sources. > > If you have not, I suggest you do a search on the net and seek out those > reviews. If is important to establish facts, but not if they are > fraudulent. > > Hank > Just who are these critics who you say have "discredited" Joan Peters? If > you are talking about Daniel Pipes, he did not deny the facts in her > central premise -- that Jews, not "Palestinians", are the indigenous people Um, weren't you aware that if you leave a land/territory for a protracted period of time, you cease to be "indigenous" to it? The Romany left India about a thousand years ago - now they regard themselves as thoroughly European - they ceased being "indigenous" to India at the time they left. Or are you claiming that the English are indigenous to the Frisian archipelago and the Saxony/Jutland coast? Because, that is _where_ the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes came from, less than 2 thousand years ago - considerably less than the time Jews have been dispersed from Iudaea, Samaria, et alii. Ditto for many of the Franks - oops, should that read "French"? Now we come to think of it, the New Zealand Maori only arrived in New Zealand less than one thousand years ago. They have traditions - in alignment with all other Polynesian peoples - of coming from a land called Hawaiki - in Samoan, Savai'i, which is also the name of one of the islands of Samoa - in Hawaiian, Hawai'i, which is also the name by which the entire archipelago is known by. New Zealand law recognises New Zealand Maori as indigenous, because they were here when the various mechanisms of colonial rule were set up - are you denying the validity and applicability of New Zealand law, based as it is on British law, which was the law Israel of all nations, used as its legal template? > of Israel. He questioned her literary style, her excessive use of quotes, > and her sloppy citation of sources. Pipes did NOT state that Peters' > sources were wrong nor did he say that her conclusions were in error; he > said that "most of the book is irrelevant to its central thesis." > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/5172) In which case we must ask, why did she feel the necessity of padding out the text so much? And what happens if that padding is cut out? What effect does it have on the thesis? Norman G. Finkelstein, in "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict" argued that it destroys the thesis. As far as Pipes goes, his problem is that he demands that Peter's thesis be first accepted and then people attempt to disprove it - in academic circles, it tends to be the other way around - you need to _prove_ your thesis first against the questions and arguments raised against it. Indeed, in relation to Pipes' grotesquerie that: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/5172 "Zionists resembled the British, Germans, and other Europeans of modern times who settled in sparsely populated areas-Australia, southern Africa, or the American West-and then attracted the indigenous people to themselves." I should perhaps point out that in most of those cases he refers to, early contact was intermittent, and often hostile. In the Australian case, you only got the Aborigines clustering around the British settlements because their hunting grounds had been taken away and it was either cluster or starve. And while starving, run the risk of a bullet because the British settlers were bigots who were frightened of the blackfellow. Clustering around the foreign settlers most often happened after "pacification" when the indigenous people could no longer support themselves in their usual style, and had to beg for a crust of what had once been theirs. You see, equal trade was never foremost in the minds of most settlers. Pipes is genocidally wrong - nice to see you, Dafna Yee, sticking up for someone who believes not in the "peoples right of self-determination", but in the "peoples right of extermination by foreigners". Adolf Eichmann would be proud of you. As far as I'm concerned, you sicken me. And of course, Porath tends to put it all together rather well: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/5172 "The coastal area had several main attractions for the [inland Palestinian] Arab villagers. They found jobs in constructing, and later working in, the port of Haifa, the Iraq Petroleum Company refineries, the railway workshops, and the nascent Arab industries there. They also took part in the large-scale cultivation of the citrus groves between Haifa and Jaffa and found jobs connected with the shipment of citrus fruits from the Jaffa port. Contrary to what Mr. Pipes claims, all these developments had almost nothing to do with the growth of the Jewish National Home. The main foreign factor that brought them about was the Mandatory government. The Zionist settlers had a clearly stated policy against using Arab labor or investing in Arab industries. At the same time, the natural increase in the Palestinian Arab population I referred to is made clear in the statistical abstracts and quarterly surveys published by the Mandatory government in the years following the census of 1931." So the Palestinians turned up for work with the Zionist settlers for the perverse pleasure of being turned down and having to trudge all the way back to whereever they had come from? I take it that whatever Joan Peters was smoking, was legal? > > This is the conclusion of Paul Blair's review, one of the critics of Joan > Peters' book, which specifically refers to both Pipes' and Sanders' > comments: "Such embarrassing concessions by the book's prominent defenders > raise valid doubts about its integrity. And if Paul Blair had any scholarly integrity, he would pay attention to these valid doubts about its integrity. (Most aircraft engineers _never_ get a second chance to forget about valid doubts about an aircraft's structural integrity - most people would prefer to work with people with greater personal integrity.) Particularly in the light of Porath's statement: "Therefore, until that date, it was mainly the Muslims who had good reason not to register their names with the census authorities or, for that matter, with any other official authorities, since registration made them easy prey for the draft officers. The same fear prompted them to avoid the land registers too - with disastrous results for their property rights." This same conundrum occurred for Maori in New Zealand's colonial history - register your family/subtribe/tribe's land holdings and risk losing them in paying the lawyer's fees and punitive taxation, etc, or not do it, and risk having the government just take it off you. > On the other hand, both Sanders and > Pipes still defend Peters' central thesis. Besides verifying the critics' > claims, then, these pages will also weigh their significance relative to > the book as a whole. Whatever the findings, Israel's right to exist does > not hinge on Peters' claims that the land was empty when the Jews arrived > and that the Palestinians are recent arrivals. The right of a country to > exist depends on its recognition of individual rights. I would dearly love to see the Sioux, et cetera, take the United States to court with this as the main legal principle. And in that case, why did Arafat have to declare he recognized Israel's right to exist? > By this criterion, > Israel--with all its > imperfections--stands head and shoulders above the Arab dictatorships of > the region (including Arafat's) as far as legitimacy is concerned." > http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2135 > > So, you see, it was neither Peters' sources nor her facts which are > fraudulent! Just for the record, neither are mine! No, just her and your interpretation of them. > > Dafna Yee, director > JWD - Jewish Watch Dog > http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net > > --- > / o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals) > ===OO=====OO================================================= > http://pnews.org/vortal/ New World disOrder and Myth Busters > http://g0lem.net/vortal/ Insane Planet and Wacko World > http://g0lem.net/portal/ Bad-Ass Truth and TheGolemsPortal > http://pnews.org/portal/ Naked Truth and PNEWS Portal > ============================================================= > \_/ \_/ -- Wesley Parish * * * Clinersterton beademung - in all of love. RIP James Blish * * * Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." --- / o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals) ===OO=====OO================================================= http://pnews.org/vortal/ New World disOrder and Myth Busters http://g0lem.net/vortal/ Insane Planet and Wacko World http://g0lem.net/portal/ Bad-Ass Truth and TheGolemsPortal http://pnews.org/portal/ Naked Truth and PNEWS Portal ============================================================= \_/ \_/
