Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
By the way, Morris never denounced his earlier works as you say--which, in any case, have been amply corroborated by other sources as well. That is simply another false statement by you. He has rejected the Palestinians as objects of his sympathy, that is all--but this is something else. He has said he only believes Ben Gurion did not go far enough--not that he did not attempt to purge the new nation of indigenous Arabs. Nor can you prove what you contend--that he has renounced his own scholarship.
121 posted on 09/09/2003 8:44:32 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]


To: ultima ratio
By the way, Morris never denounced his earlier works as you say

Lie. From "Peace? No Chance," by Benny Morris (Gamla.org, 2/23/02):

1.) "What appears to have stayed the hands of President Hafez Assad and subsequently his son and successor, Bashar Assad, was not quibbles about a few hundred yards here or there but a basic refusal to make peace with the Jewish state."

This flatly and directly contradicts what he wrote in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem. Grownups (and honest debaters) routinely refer to this sort of thing -- restating an earlier argument contra to your previously held position -- as refuting one's original stance. But you knew this, of course.

2.) "After Husseini came Arafat, another implacable nationalist and inveterate liar, trusted by no Arab, Israeli or American leader (though there appear to be many Europeans who are taken in)."

This flatly and directly contradicts Morris' earlier estimation of Arafat in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee problem. Grownups (and honest debaters) routinely refer to this sort of thing -- restating an earlier argument contra to your previously held position -- as refuting one's original stance. But you knew this, of course.

3.) "The Palestinian Authority (PA) has emerged as a virtual kingdom of mendacity, where every official, from President Arafat down, spends his days lying to a succession of western journalists. The reporters routinely give the lies credence equal to or greater than what they hear from straight, or far less mendacious, Israeli officials. One day Arafat charges that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) uses uranium-tipped shells against Palestinian civilians. The next day it's poison gas. Then, for lack of independent corroboration, the charges simply vanish - and the Palestinians go on to the next lie, again garnering headlines in western and Arab newspapers. Daily, Palestinian officials bewail Israeli "massacres" and "bombings" of Palestinian civilians - when in fact there have been no massacres and the bombings have invariably been directed at empty PA buildings."

This, of course, is in direct, screaming contradiction to Morris' own earlier conclusions, in The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem; hell, it completely cancels out the earlier work, by replacing the failed and inaccurate base assumption (i.e., "Evil Jews") with one actually grounded in verifiable history and events (i.e., Arabs Attempting To Annihilate All Jews, All the Time"). Grownups (and honest debaters) routinely refer to this sort of thing -- restating an earlier argument contra to your previously held position -- as refuting one's original stance. But you knew this, of course.

4.) "But whatever my findings, we are now 50 years on - and Israel exists. Like every people, the Jews deserve a state, and justice will not be served by throwing them into the sea. And if the refugees are allowed back, there will be godawful chaos and, in the end, no Israel."

Most shriekingly obvious of all -- and the least gainsayable by you, no matter how desperately, devoutly you (clearly) wish it otherwise: the clear and unequivocal statement that there can e no "Right of Return" is a DIRECT SELF-REFUTATION of Morris' own earlier, publicly-held position on this matter... and not all the spinning and spluttering on your part will ever change that; a fact you must endeavor to incorporate and live with, as best you (ultimately) can.

Grownups (and honest debaters) routinely refer to this sort of thing -- restating an earlier argument contra to your previously held position -- as refuting one's original stance.

But you knew this, of course.

124 posted on 09/09/2003 9:09:41 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("The Clintons have damaged our country. They have done it together, in unison." -- Peggy Noonan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson