Maybe it’s my charming boyish naivete, but I’m still surprised by how pervasive the Palestinian lies have become. Case in point: the sumptuous DK/Smithsonian book History of the World, Map by Map (2018). Here are the (to put it mildly) distortions in the two-page “Israel and the Middle East” (pp.332-3).
Captions 1, 2: The five Arab states are reported to have attacked Israel on its foundation in 1948, with Israel’s “seizing 50 percent of the area allocated to an Arab state.”
We’re told of Israel then “sacking” “up to 600 Palestinian villages” but nothing on the Arab attacks either then or from the 1920s on. No mention of their collaboration with the Nazis. This — typically — disguises the Palestinians’ genocidal project as a land dispute. It's all a matter framing. The Palestinians are presented as victims by framing out the roots of the culture clash.
By the way, those Arabs did not call themselves “Palestinian” until 1965. They had always rejected the term for fear of losing attachment to the Arab states. Russia then suggested that ploy to match the Israelis’ claim to being a distinct culture worthy of statehood. The “Palestinians” have no language, cultural, historical, religious or any other difference from the other Arab states. (See ‘land dispute” above). None of the PLO leaders were Palestinian (Arafat an Egyptian, etc.). Since the Romans, “Palestinian” referred to the area’s Jews. The Arabs’ claim to the historic “Palestine” expands even to include their ownership of Jesus, the nice Jewish boy who did so well.
“As a result more than 700,000 Palestinians…fled their homes and went into exile in neighbouring countries.” Omitted: the neighbouring Arab states’ commanded the Arabs to leave Israel so as not to impede their “driving the Jews into the sea.” That compliance, the abandonment of their homes on their neighbours' orders, was the original meaning of their term "naqba," or "the catastrophe." Those “neighbouring countries” then largely refused entry to those refugees, preferring to leave them stateless for 75 years (and counting), strictly to create problems for Israel.
Of course, there is no mention of the 800,000 Jews at that time expropriated and expelled from the Arab states and largely taken in by Israel. Only Israel is reported to have erred and transgressed in such a banishment. But only the Palestinians are heard demanding reparations and the "right to return," not even that original number but with all their descendants, to swamp and destroy the Jews.
The text elaborates a bit. Immediately after Israel’s declaration of independence ”Israeli forces promptly captured swathes of Palestinian territory and drove many of its people into exile.” No, that happened after the Arabs started the war. And the local Arabs fled, as ordered. The Arab nations attacked, Israel defended herself. Then as now.
After the 1967 and 1973 wars “Israel has failed to make peace with its Palestinian population.” First, making peace is just Israel’s responsibility, not even in part the Palestinians’? Anyway, the Palestinians rejected all six of Israel’s peace offers since 1948 and two others, with no negotiation or counter-offer.
Second, Gaza and the West Bank are governed by Hamas and the PA, respectively. They are not part of Israel’s population. Their liberties are curtailed and their economy in ruins because of their governments, not Israel’s. Given that the Palestinians insist on replacing the Jews, not living with them — “Free from the River to the Sea,” etc. — Israel’s “failure” to oblige may not seem so evil.
The text nods at that: “Israel’s intention to cede land for peace has proved difficult to put into practice, with the result that relations with the Palestinians remain fraught.” The text leaves the Palestinian in the passive voice, accorded no responsibility at all for their own demand for the Jews’ genocide.
Oh, yes, given the consequences of Israel having vacated Gaza in 2005, perhaps there should be no mystery why “Israel has been reluctant to relinquish Jerusalem and the West Bank.” The wording suggests Israel should be giving up “Jerusalem” entirely, not just what Jordan renamed the West Bank after its illegal 1948 grab of the historically Jewish territories, Judea (get it?) Samaria and East Jerusalem.
Given this mess of prejudice and ignorance I’m not inclined to read any other parts of this book. Perhaps I’ll tear out those pages and stuff it into one of those Little Libraries. But who knows? Perhaps the rest of the book is fine, not so discoloured by racial and cultural prejudice posed as fact.
Here is the worst part. I see no Arab names attached to the credits. These lies have become mainstream Western thought, parroted sans judgment, against history, against humanity, supporting their genocidal campaign. Antisemitism runs that deep.
