Does anyone accept the existence of Bernard Lewis's "scholarship" in the Islamic world, I wonder?

What a bizarre comment, Ms. Gee.

Perhaps you could explain the significance of one part of the world's acceptance or rejection of someone's "scholarship" versus their widespread acceptance in all the others. And once you do that, you could explain what accounts for any potential disparities in acceptance, especially in light of what currently passes for scholarship in the particular region in question.

Less books are translated into Arabic per annum than into Greek, despite a thirty-fold difference in size between the two populations. Perhaps you are familiar with a new kind of less worldly and less literate form of scholarship that you could enlighten us on? How enticing!

Professor Bernard Lewis in this post is consciously and deliberately
- Underpinning Israeli continued occupation of Palestinian and Syrian territories
And
-Supporting its expansionist designs and its gradual annexation of lands under its domination.

This is made in the guise of an "innocent” scholarly question:
“Whether the Arabs are willing to accept the existence of Israel?”

He, more than most, should know perfectly well that the universally accepted leadership of the Palestinian people, Arafat &Co, DID ACCEPT the existence of Israel within the 1967 borders in Oslo as far back as 1993....

Professor Lewis should, surely would, equally know that at Israeli request and US seconding the PNC (the Palestinian National Council accepted to excise, void and annul from the PLO Covenant any and all reference to the Liberation of all of historical Palestine (the continued inclusion of which could be construed as a non recognition of the existence of Israel) during President Clinton's visit to Gaza.

Professor Lewis also surely knows that at the Beirut Arab Summit of all Arab states then Price, now King, Abdullah's , of Saudi Arabia, peace proposal endorsed full Arab recognition of Israel's existence in return of full Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967.

*What more DOES Professor Lewis demand and expect?
*Why the question at all?

The points insidiously made here by Professor Lewis is , at best:
-That as long as Arabs do NOT accept "Israel’s existence" Israel is within its rights to continue occupying the lands it is presently occupying until such a time when etc, etc
AND, at worst, that:
-Unless and until there is an UNCONDITIONAL ( ie no strings attached re occupied territories and of a geographically undefined Israel ) acceptance of Israel 's existence ;Israel is within its rights to go on expanding in Arab lands by annexing, whatever lands it deems necessary for its "security" and prosperity and/or general well being.

This is the message conveyed by Professor Lewis which is, in essence, a brief outline of Israel's present peace strategy of:
-Unconditional Palestinian and Arab acceptance of and submission to Israeli “peace terms”; i.e. total Arab capitulation
-Irrevocable acceptance of a geographically UNDEFINED Israel with “flexible” borders to be set solely at Israel’s sole convenience.
All couched in the scholarly words of a Princeton Professor in the form of a question!
No surprises here, though!

Perhaps Arabic speakers prefer to read books in Arabic. And there are more books published by Islamic schoars iin the Arab world than published by non-Arab scholars (and "scholars") in the West.

As for your final point, the evidence of your past posts would indicate that you have long been far beyond the reach of any degree of enlightenment or, indeed, simple commonsense.

The Arabs also send people to prison for calling a Teddy bear, Muhammad. 99% of the Arab world is composed of failed political, economical and social systems.

I see that Joseph is one of Bernard Lewis's less adept students. Better a few days in the chokey to appease the more brainless mullahs, than extrordinary rendition followed by years of systematic torture for walking down the street the wrong way, or being a Gazaan watching the concentration camp walls being built around you while children suffer and die from lack of food and medicine.

Sally Gee:

The Palestinian refugee situation may be tragic but it is NOT unique in origin, it is NOT unique in suffering and it is NOT unique in scale. The only thing that is unique is blaming the Jews over and over again in your obsessive way as if this situation WERE unique. And blaming the Jews when the situation is not unique is a sign of anti-semitism--according to the EU.

There were numerous population exchanges and displacements at the end of WWII and during decolonization:

1. About ten million Germans had to flee their centuries-old homes in eastern Europe in 1945. A million died; another million were raped. They were not welcomed in western Germany, and there was much much suffering. Some Eastern European is enjoying those Germans' property as we speak. None of these Germans or their descendants is blowing up discos in Danzig.

2. About seven million Hindus had to flee from what became Pakistan (and an equal number of Muslims fled from India). Some Muslim is enjoying these Hindus' property as we speak. No Hindus are blowing up schoolyards filled with students in Islamabad.

3. The number of Palestinian refugees resulting from the Nakbah of 1948 is about 750,000. Bernard Lewis is right: the number of Jewish refugees expelled from Muslim states between 1948 and 1960 was LARGER: about 850,000. These Jews were forced to leave everything behind (uncompensated). Some Muslim is enjoying these Jews' property even as we speak (perhaps this illegally-seized property could be a source of compensation for the Palestinians!). None of these Jews or their descendants is blowing up supermarkets in Marakesh or Aden.

4. About 300,000 Greeks were intentionally forced from Egypt by the Nasser government policies 1953 and 1960--in order to Egyptianize and Muslimize Egypt; this is an example of conscious ethnic and religious cleansing to the max. Most of these Greeks had come to Egypt in the early 19th century; but some had been in Egypt for 2,300 years. The refugees weren't happy, nor was it easy for them to assimilate where they ended up: there was much suffering and trauma. They had to leave everything behind (uncompensated); some Muslim is enjoying their property as we speak. No one speaks about this at the UN. And no Greeks are blowing up buses in Cairo.

5. Millions of Greeks were forced from western Turkey in 1922; the ethnic cleansing of Greeks by the Turkish government went on as late as 1955 in the area called "Pontus" on the south coast of the Black Sea; this was conscious govt ethnic and religious cleansing to the max. there was much suffering and trauma and the Greek refugees remain bitter and when a Greek "Pontic" refugee girl won a gold medal in the Olympics in 1992 the bitterness in Greece was very public. None of these Greeks or their descendants is blowing up restaurants in Ankara.

6. About 50,000 Hindu Indians were driven from Uganda in 1972 by Idi Amin in a program of ethnic and religious cleansing. Their property was confiscated (uncompensated). Someone designated by Idi Amin and his successors as an "African" is enjoying these Hindus' property even as we speak. None of these Hindus or their descendants are intentionally shooting rockets at civilians in Uganda.

When I pointed out these parallel tragedies to a Muslim, and these parallel "thefts", and the lack of terrorism on the part of the victims, his response is revealing: "None of these people is as honorable as the Palestinians are."

I wish I was making up this psychologically revealing story. I assure you that, unfortunately, I am not.

(I also posted this message on the other thread where you were at work, Sally.)

The UNIQUENESS OF Professor ECKSTEIN!
With Professor Eckstein there is, sometimes, a brain flash, or flush?, that takes the breath away of the unsuspecting and even of the suspecting observer:
For a human man made tragedy, or a crime as is the case here, to be of concern to the average, well intentioned and neutral onlooker it must be UNIQUE!

If NOT unique it would be a hum drum, run of the mill every day occurrence that should bother no body and should, at least, be tolerated and accepted....if not rewarded!
A breath taking assertion, effusion, of exceptional brain prowess cum impeccable morality!
Carried slightly forward why bother about a break in burglary that led to the death or incapacitation of the homeowner or for that matter about a massacre like My Lai since both are NOT unique in human chronicles!

Apart from the fact that all the "parallels" he draws to the problem of the Palestinian refugees are replete with custom made fabrications( no Jews were expelled from any Arab country; all departing Jews chose willingly to join their brethren in their colonialist adventure) and outright omissions ( India/Pakistan was a mutually agreed partition plan with an agreed human exchange) to suit his purpose he consciously fails to note or heed the basic fundamental difference that sets the Palestinian refugees problem apart and makes it, in comparison , unique(?)!

That fundamental difference that brainy Eckstein brushes away is that:

In none of the cited parallels was an indigenous population deliberately ethnically cleansed from its home land to vacate it so that ALIENS should be brought in to supplant him and colonize it!

(Sort of clearing the grounds to prepare it to receive a new edifice!)

Failure to note that all too obvious fundamental difference is, however, part and parcel of the ongoing Zionist/Israeli plan to systematically rob the indigenous Palestinian people of its land in its homeland while supplanting it with ALIENS selected and screened according to unequivocally racial/RACIST criteria ; as are , more recently, the SETTLEMENTS and the WALL!

"The Palestinian refugee situation may be tragic but it is NOT unique in origin, it is NOT unique in suffering and it is NOT unique in scale. The only thing that is unique is blaming the Jews over and over again in your obsessive way as if this situation WERE unique. And blaming the Jews when the situation is not unique is a sign of anti-semitism--according to the EU."

OK, suffering ethnic cleansing is not unique, but a sense of reality and a little commonsense kind if hints that the application of at least one repugnant strand of Jewish thought - Zionism - has led directly to the plight of the Palestinian people to the benefit of the Jews who have taken over their land. It can't get much clearer than that, can it?

Sally, the only thing unique about the Palestinian situation is that it has never been allowed to be resolved. The Israelis offered quite a deal in 2000 and 2001 and it was turned down. The quote I gave you from the Muslim explains the psychological reason why--and that is the Palestinians' fault. Meanwhile, the UN has NEVER taken up the plight of the 300,000 Greeks of Alexandria, NOR has the UN ever taken up the plight of the 850,000 Jews who were expelled from Arab lands. BOTH these cases are examples of ethnic cleansing carried out by govts; in the case of the 850,000 Jews this is more than the total Palestinian Nakbah (in the case of the Germans and the Hindus it is TEN TIMES the size of the Palestinian Nakhbah and occurred during the same five-year period) The Jews of Muslim lands lost everything too, by Muslim govt decree and pressure and violence--as did the 300,000 Greeks of Egypt. To repeat: some Muslim is enjoying these people's property, the property of Greeks and Jews, as we speak. Where is your indignation about THIS, Sally? In the case of the millions of Greeks from Ionia and Pontus, they had lived there for 2,500 years, were a majority in Ionia, and were expelled by the Turks who came as conquerors ca. 1500 A.D. and were a minority. Where is your indignation, Sally? Where is your bitter anger? In the case of the Hindus of Sind and Punjab (which became Pakistan), they had lived in the region for 3,000 years.

I think the KEY to your bitter anger is your remark about "one repugnant strain in Jewish thought", which is your definition of Zionism. You are not concerned or focused on "one repugnant strain" in Muslim thought. Or in Egyptian thought. Or in Turkish thought. No--your focus is solely on JEWS. Only JEWS are not allowed to do things that other peoples do (even when they are attacked), or if they do, THEY deserve special bitter condemnation.

Israel/Palestine is a tragic situation, but it is an artifical tragedy created not least by Arab govt policies, To adopt the double standards of moral judgment that you adopt here, Salley, fits the definition of anti-semitism adopted by the European Union.

The issue of the expulsion of Middle Eastern Jews from Arab lands is a topic we have gone over in great historical detaill with you, Omar; this occurred last year, and it was proven to you, in DETAIL, that your statement about these Jews "leaving willingly to join their brethren's colonial adventure" is outrageous.

At the time, last year, those of us who remonstrated with Omar about grotesque fabrication could chalk stuff like this up to his sheer ignorance. No more.

The fact is, Sally Gee, that the MAJORITY of the Israeli Jewish population are refugees from Muslim lands, or their descendants--they came with nothing, deprived of everything by their oppressors, and they are basically Middle Easterner refugees, not European colonialists.

"Israel/Palestine is a tragic situation, but it is an artifical tragedy created not least by Arab govt policies, To adopt the double standards of moral judgment that you adopt here, Salley, fits the definition of anti-semitism adopted by the European Union."

Well, it is a tragedy, but a very real tragedy created by a deadly combination of British stupidity, Zionist malignity and American venality. I am not sure what the EU has to do with my argument, but I use no double standards - which is why I regard Zionism as the most direct contemporary expression of Nazism. Same criteria, same foul beast, same judgement.

You are unteachable. You are holding Jews to a different standard of behavior than (say) Egyptians, Turks, or Pakistanis. That is the double standard and the EU officially defines the use of this double standard as anti-semitism.

The only people with ties to the Nazi ideology are the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular. See works in Germany by intellectuals such as Mathias Kuentzel Jihad and Jew Hatred: Nazism, Islamism and the Roots of 9/11 trans. (Telos Press, 2007) and historians such as Michael Mailmann and Martin Cuppers, Halbmond und Hakenkreuz Das Dritte Reich, Die Araber und Palastina [Crescent and Swastika: The Third Reich, The Arabs and Palestine], which have recently explored the direct lineages and impact of the radical anti-Semitism in Germany and Europe to the emergence of radical Islam in the Middle East in the 1930s and 1940s.

And if that is too complex for you in terms of Nazism and radical Islam, simple google-image 'Hezbollah + salute", and see what you come up with. I dare you.

But scholarship clearly means nothing to you, Sally, complex history means nothing to you, and neither do facts, so for my part I end the conversation here.

Lewis makes a brief for no compromise.

Sure, there are Arabs committed to ending Israel's existence. There are others who do not welcome it, but consider it an established fact.

A question to ask is, what actions would be helpful? What will isolate extremists and encourage live-and-let-live?

"Sally, the only thing unique about the Palestinian situation is that it has never been allowed to be resolved"
Well Sally !

Not that you need any tutoring ;neither by the short tempered Professor who fails to understand the A, B & C of education in that if he is unconvincing, untrustworthy and obtuse to the point of absurdity his "students" are within their natural right not to accept, and positively reject, what he has to say.

Nor by a nonprofessor who has something, some basic facts, relatively rarely, or seldom,aired in the USA!

Not that, Sally , you need either , however I find your exchange with the short tempered so called Professor illuminating in that it demonstrates the way that even the most basic means of communication, words and the intrinsic meaning of words, are perverted in a manner that NOT only distorts them but, also,insiduously implies any thing EXCEPT the facts behind them.

Professor??Eckstein sentence quoted above is a typical example .

"...it has never been allowed to be resolved"

by which he means that :

" these Palestinian refugees have stubornly turned down all offers of alternative dwelling (with or without new "citizenships" )and/or financial compensation because they insist and uphold their inalienable right to RETURN to their native homeland and regain the ownership and the use of their legitimate property!".

This fairly sraight forward ennunciation of their collective desire and will,simplt: they want to go back to their own homes, is worded as :
"...it has never been allowed to be resolved."

"You are unteachable."

But, then, you do not seem to be much of a teacher (or should I spell it "teecher"?) if the capacity for rational argument is one of the criteria we use to judge your performance so far.

"You are holding Jews to a different standard of behavior than (say) Egyptians, Turks, or Pakistanis."

This does not follow from anything I have said and it is precisely the opposite of everything I have said. Like I say, you are not much of a teecher.

"That is the double standard and the EU officially defines the use of this double standard as anti-semitism."

I think the EU probably officially defines any acceptance of your stupid arguments in support of Jewish Nazis as making use of the double standard of total dumbism.

"The only people with ties to the Nazi ideology are the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular."

I see what I see, and I hear what I hear, and what I see and hear are Jewish Nazis on somebody else's land while you justify Zionist mayhem and murder with Nazi arguments.

Charles,

I think that you are missing Professor Lewis' point. His point is that Arabs - even those counties which have signed treaties with Israel - do not accept Israel as a permanent presence in the region but, instead, as a presence in the region until such time as the Arab side has sufficient military prowess to alter the facts on the ground.

His is not an argument against reaching a deal with Arabs. It is, instead, a warning about the sort of deal that is possible. And, it is a warning that the Israelis need to negotiate with realism that a peace deal will not end the dispute.

Ms. Gee,

You make very serious charges. You refer to Israelis as Nazis. How about some evidence.

As usual, N. Friedman gets things exactly correctly.

Charles, you only have to read Omar's posting (#116245) today at 12:59 PM to see the terrible problem to which both Lewis and Friedman are pointing.

Check out the TV news and, if you have eyes, you shall see. It's become that simple and so obvious because the Zionist Nazis don't really care who knows. They are even proud of the walls which concentrate the Palestinian population into the Gaza camp, just like Warsaw - and the Rising of the Warsaw Ghetto failed heroically but, somehow, in some perverse way, the Zionists only learned lessons the Nazis drew from that experience only too well.

Sally,

What you cite is not evidence of what you claim.

So that you will see why your contention is simply wrong, you should consider that the Nazis set out a program of conquest that killed about 50 million people. And, not only did they target civilians intentionally but they attempted to eradicate civilians, including most particularly, Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals.

Nothing remotely like that is happening to Palestinian Arabs or anyone else at the hands of the Israelis. In fact, there is substantial population growth among Palestinian Arabs. And, there have not been remotely the number of casualties as occurred at the hands of the Nazis.

So, what you write makes no sense. I think you need to read about the Nazis because what you assert has no even remote bearing on the matter. And that is even assuming that what you wrote were correct, which it is not.

Again: if you have some real evidence, I would consider it. Thus far, however, nothing you have said supports your contention.

Art,

Thank you for your kind words.

N.F., I also don't think the Nazis built a wall around the Warsaw Ghetto in order to protect themselves from a two-years' long campaign by Jews going out into Warsaw and intentionally killing hundreds of civilians, women, children, old men, blowing up dozens of busses filled with civilians, blowing up nightclubs filled with teenagers, blowing up dozens of old people at religious services, blowing up children in restaurants, blowing up young students in university dining halls. No. You know--I don't think the Polish Jews did that. So, you know, it's not exactly a good analogy from Sally.

In addition, the only people interested in genocide are the Palestinians. That's the meta- message of Palestinian suicide bombing--ANY Jew will do. It's in fact totally racist. We see in the case of the Fateh murder of the Palestinian George Khoury that anybody who EVEN LOOKS like a Jew will do. (The PLO apologized for that murder of course--they meant to kill a Jew. Any Jew. Too bad for Khoury that he "looked Jewish.")

Professor,

No need to convince me. My point was to note that the Nazi assertion has no basis in fact. We shall see if Ms. Gee is honest or something else. If she is honest, she will certainly admit that her theory is wrong as what she writes is contradicted by the record.

We'll see, N.F. Don't count on getting any evidence from Ms. Gee--because there isn't any. This is in contrast to the historic PALESTINIAN ties with the Nazis, which we have often proven, and about which I presented two separate scholarly books in a post up above.

As for the anti-terrorism wal (which has been quite effective against terrorist attacks, btw), it encloses the JEWS, not the Palestinians. It has been objected to in Israel precisely because it seems to recreate the Warsaw Ghetto with the Jews inside. But NOTHING "surrounds" the Palestinians on the Jordanian side of the West Bank. The Palestinians aren't enclosed, just prevented from launching genocidal racist attacks.

And meanwhile, if you wish to see Palestinian Hamas soldiers doing the overt Nazi salute, just google-image "Hamas + Salute". And if you want to see Fatah soldiers doing the overt Nazi salute, just google image "Fatah + Salute". And if you want to see Hezbollah soldiers doing the overt Nazi salute, just google image "Hezbollah + salute".

Professor,

A witness often saws off the tree limb he sits on without any assistance.

Gotcha.

Art

"A witness often saws off the tree limb he sits on without any assistance."

Very gnomic, I am sure, but whatever rationale you two clowns choose to offer, it is action, not words, which count and the actions of the the Jewish Zionist state against the Palestinian people are the actions we associate with Nazis.

If it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi, you can be pretty sure it is a Nazi however much you dress it up - that's the nature of evidence in the real world.

"His is not an argument against reaching a deal with Arabs. It is, instead, a warning about the sort of deal that is possible. And, it is a warning that the Israelis need to negotiate with realism that a peace deal will not end the dispute."

Echoes of the Stalin-Ribbentrop pact here! Lewis' advice, according to messrs Eckstein and Friedman, seems to take the form that it should attack lke a Nazi, negotiate like a Nazi, and in all other ways be just like a Nazi! What does this imply for the rest of the world, I wonder?

"His is not an argument against reaching a deal with Arabs. It is, instead, a warning about the sort of deal that is possible. And, it is a warning that the Israelis need to negotiate with realism that a peace deal will not end the dispute."

Echoes of the Stalin-Ribbentrop pact here! Lewis' advice, according to messrs Eckstein and Friedman, seems to take the form that it should attack lke a Nazi, negotiate like a Nazi, and in all other ways be just like a Nazi! What does this imply for the rest of the world, I wonder?

Ms. Gee,

Again, Ms. Gee, I am awaiting evidence, not assertions. What is your evidence that supports your thesis about Israel?

Consider, Ms. Gee, that this is a site for professional historians and history buffs. When you make wild accusations - which is what you have done - your readers either assume that you do not know anything or they take you as a specimen of a certain type of person. Either way, you place yourself into the group of people who have no influence.

Ms. Gee,

I was merely indicating what Professor Lewis stated in his article. That was not my advice but his.

And that is precisely what I said, Mr Friedman. It is my experience that a close reading of any text pays dividends if our intention to avoid any silly misunderstanding.

I make mild assertions, Mr Freidman, not wild accusations.

The evidence has been much rehearsed on TV (although perhaps not Fox), the public prints, the www, etc, if you choose to see it - but I suspect you, like your predecessors, the Nazi apologists of the 1930s, chose long ago to live in a world of invisible walls justifying every depravity on the grounds of past victimisation. And it's happening now to await the attentions of future generations of "professional historians and history buffs" some of whom, I have no doubt, will be just like you - the witting creatures of an ideology which justifies the acceptance of any evil if it will cause the argument to pan out in a way which suits their ends.

Ms. Gee,

I evidently understood what you wrote differently than what you intended.

Ms. Gee,

Surely you can point me to some of this evidence which you claim supports your contention, which is what is normally done by posters on this site when their theories are challenged.

Sometime in the not very distant past we were told that Professor Eckstein was selected, elected?,as the :
" Outstanding Teacer of the Year"; or something to that effect.

Recently we had the opportunity to observe him in action, in his native milieu, teaching!
The way he goes about it seems to be UNIQUE; for that is how he responds to the queries , or reacts to the remarks of one perceived by him as one of his "students":

** "You are unteachable. ."

** "And if that is too complex for you"

** "I dare you."

** "But scholarship clearly means nothing to you"

** "complex history means nothing to you,"

** "and neither do facts,"

What I recall is that award was from the University of Maryland , USA; or, from the sound of it, was that award from a Herut kibutzim primary school, I wonder ???

Like you, Omar, Ms. Gee responded to a long list of specific facts I offered not with counter-facts or logical argument but with vague and insulting name-calling.

As we speak she is being skewered by N. Friedman for not being able to back up a single one of her wild assertions with any specific evidence.

A student who cannot deal with facts and cannot respond with either counterfacts or logic but only with insults and vague accusations--someone like you or Ms. Gee--is indeed unteachable.

An example of your own unteachablity: your grotesque reassertions that the Jews of the Middle East left the Muslim countries voluntarily in order to join their brethren in their "colonialist enterprise." You therefore ignore the long discussion we had about this last year just as if it had never taken place, and the specific and deeply-sourced scholarship on this topic to which you were pointed as if it does not exist; instead you simply recycled the grosses propaganda, the grotesque fabrications which ideologically suit you, just as if the conversation last year had never occurred.

That is why I have concluded that you too are unteachable. No facts, no scholarship, make an impact upon you.

This is a site for professional historians, Omar, and for lovers of history. But it requires disciplined discourse--a discourse of logic and evidence. On that score, both you and Ms. Gee get an "F", for the specific reasons I state.

And yes, I have won awards from my university both for my undergraduate and graduate teaching. Instead of throwing more insults, you ought to read the logic of the above paragraphs to understand why.

Prof
The question still stands:
"or, from the sound of it, was that award from a Herut kibutzim primary school, I wonder ???"

The Prof is still teaching.His latest gem:

"As we speak she is being skewered by N. Friedman...."

Another example of Omar's unteachability.
As I said, my teaching awards were from my university, which is not a "Jewish" university. Omar cannot respond to my specific points, so he just throws another anti-semitic insult.

The Prof is still teaching.His latest gem:

"As we speak she is being skewered by N. Friedman...."

I am not theorising; I am asserting. I am also aware that, in Eric Hoffer's useful classification, you are a "true believer" and beyond rational persuasion.

However, in the hope that something might rub off on you, like many students, one tool I have found extremely useful in understanding the reality of the Jewish oppression of the Palestinians is The Arab-Israel Dispute by Don Peretz, Facts on File, 1996 (with an excellent guide to research sources), and the greatest sources of analytical clarity are The Making of the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1947-1951 by Ilan Pappe, Joseph Roth's pre-WW2 The Wandering Jews, Hannah Arendt's On Totalitarianism and On Revolution, and - probably much to his surprise - Michael Burleigh's Earthly Powers. Oh, and the TV, the internet and the public prints - all filtered through an anti-Nazi perspective.

I do believe that poor Omar is misunderstanding the term "skewer."

Ms. Gee,

Three points.

One. I did not ask you to provide me with a list of authors. I asked you to cite some evidence that supports your contention. Do you have any?

Two. I am familiar with a number of the authors you cite. The ones I have read simply do not claim the same thing you claim (or even a similar thing) - at least not the writers with whom I am familiar. But, even if they did, such would be question of their citing evidence - which I doubt they do since they would have the difficulty that, as I noted, there is no campaign - nor has there ever been a campaign - by Israel to exterminate anyone. So, the most that such an author could say is that they found an Israeli who holds nasty views, not that Zionism is a form of Nazism or that Israel is a Nazi country - as you would have it.

Three. You indicate that I am a true believer. Since you do not know me and do not know my views, that is quite an assertion to make. In fact, I go where the evidence goes, as even my view that Jews, like anyone else, have a right to a homeland does not extend to the point of lying. Can you say the same for your approach?

Prof
I do know that it is NOT scr....!
Did you have that in mind and chickened away from using it?
With you no body can tell for sure.
Elucidate ....Professor!!!!

I'm confused -- Bernard Lewis wrote this? Arabs can't accept the existence of Israel, because the Persians nuked it last year on August 22. It was in the Wall Street Journal and everything.

Since Omar says he is not saying that I was making some sort of obscene comment, fine. But any thinking person can see that Friedman has asked Ms. Gee to support her wild charges of Israeli Nazism with specific evidence, and she has not supported her wild charges, and she cannot, because no such evidence exists. Friedman thus has skewered her.

You know what I mean by evidence, Omar. Not wild ideological assertions. I mean evidence such as the Palestinian Mufti Amin al-Husseini raising SS divisions of Muslims for his friends Hitler and Himmler and Eichmann. Or the ideological prosyletization and direct (personal contact) connection between SS Einsatzgruppe Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood, and hence to Hamas and, through Ayman Zawahiri, to al-Qaeda, as well as the Palestinians in the Mandate. Or all those Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah soldiers doing the Nazi salute which you can find on google-image. Or the genocidal and racist message of suicide-bombing: any Jew will do, young, old, man, woman, child) to intentionally kill (or, in the case of George Khoury, even someone who just happens to LOOK Jewish but isn't. You know, the case where Fatah apologized to the Khoury family because they meant to kill a Jew). You know, Omar--EVIDENCE.

Oh--and here's some MORE evidence of Nazi influence on the Palestinians: namely, Palestinians who are named "Hitler" as a first name:

Hitler Salah [Source: Al Hayat Al Jadida (official Fatah newpaper), Sept. 28, 2005]

Hitler Abu-Alrab [Source: Al Hayat Al Jadida (Fatah), Jan. 27, 2005]

Hitler Mahmud Abu-Libda [Source: Al Hayat Al Jadida (Fatah), Dec.18, 2000.]

Or: Hitler's book Mein Kampf as a best seller among the Palestinians (source: Agence France Presse).

Yes, that Omar and Sally Gee, is what is called SPECIFIC EVIDENCE of Nazi influence, just like in my previous post just above. Sally Gee has nothing like this to support her wild accusations, because nothing like this exists on the Israeli side.

Which is why, as I said, N. Friedman, by pointing this out, has skewered her.

Professor!!!!!!
Hot Air+Hot Air+HotAir=HOT AIR

To SKEWER a "student"; is that the way a Professor speaks???
Mr Friedman is too much of a gentleman to either do it or say it;
nor does he wish, I presume, to leave it to his, self imposed, side kick to say!
Unbecoming, truly unbecoming of a real Professor; but , think about, totally becoming Professor Eckstein!