Search This Blog

Friday, October 28, 2011

DOING THE TWIST -- WEST BANK: Part 7 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of the term WEST BANK, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.

The area referred to as the West Bank is a region, comprising JUDEA and SAMARIA, that was captured by Jordan following the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. This illegal annexation was recognized by only one country: the United Kingdom.  Jordanian authorities renamed the area the West Bank, hoping to imply that it was a part of Jordan rather than a part of Israel, in yet another effort to erase the original connection of Judea and Samaria to Jews and Israel.*   

*   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank 

DOING THE TWIST -- SETTLERS / SETTLEMENTS: Part 6 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.
  
Following is a dissection of the terms SETTLERS and SETTLEMENTS, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.

By dictionary definition, a settler is “a person who settles in a new country or area,” and a settlement is “a small community, village or group of houses in an thinly populated area.” Another definition of a settlement is “the settling of persons in a new country or place.”1 Although these definitions were obtained from a dictionary published in 1969, they do not differ from the following definitions found on the internet today: “set·tle·ment  a new colony, or a place newly colonized; a small or isolated community; village.”2 

Only when referring to settlement in Israeli territories are these terms used in a pejorative context. The settlements are perceived as “illegal” by the United Nations (UN) and, thus, by the rest of the world’s Arabists. This despite (1) the fact that the UN has become a corrupt body dominated by politically semi-free and unfree countries antithetical to the Jewish State; and (2) the Mandate for Palestine, which “laid down the Jewish legal right under international law to settle anywhere in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law.” The Mandate is still in effect, it has not lapsed, and its prescriptions are still valid and legal.3


1  The Random House Dictionary of the English Language. (unabridged). New York: Random House, 1969.
2  http://www.yourdictionary.com/settlement
3  http://www.mythsandfacts.com/article_print.asp?ArtID=101

DOING THE TWIST -- PALESTINIANS: Part 5 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of the term PALESTINIANS, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.
  
Prior to the 1967 Six-Day War Jews were Palestinians and the Palestinians of today were Arabs.1,2

Nowhere in history does one find an ethnicity known as “Palestinian.” The region historically known as “Palestine” (Syria Palaestina)  was so named by the Roman,  Hadrian, in 135 CE in an effort to erase the history of the Jewish connection to the land known at that time as “Judaea.”3  

Consequently, logic dictates that if there was never an ethnic people known as “Palestinians,” then there is no geographic area that can be identified as a “Palestinian homeland.” And if there is not a “Palestinian homeland” then the concept of a “right of return” to that mythical location is not possible.

The fact of the matter is that there were some indigenous Sephardic Jews and some indigenous Arabs in the area for centuries. However, the preponderance of Arabs arrived from other countries (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia) only after the arrival of European Jews in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This new Jewish community (yishuv) created an infrastructure and employment opportunities that attracted numerous Arabs from other countries.

It is unfortunate that these terms are so commonly mis-used, inadequately defined by the media, and dutifully repeated by the publishers of reference materials. It is a sad commentary on our editorial watchdogs asleep at their desks.


1  http://theisraelconnection.blogspot.com/2008/09/origin-of-name-palestine-truth-is.html
2  The Six-Day War was a successful preemptive strike by Israel against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, whose armed forces were massing at Israel's borders and posing a threat of war.
3  http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_name_origin.php

DOING THE TWIST -- OCCUPATION / OCCUPIED TERRITORIES: Part 4 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of the terms OCCUPATION and OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.
  
The territories in question are not “occupied,” since the term implies an illegal presence. The area in question is more appropriately a disputed territory. That is to say, the Arabs dispute the terms of the Mandate of Palestine, which calls for the close settlement of Jews upon the land lying between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.1

In point of fact, the area allotted to Jewish settlement by the Balfour Declaration2  (incorporated in the Mandate of Palestine3)  included the areas referred to currently as Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), as well as the entire area comprising present-day Jordan.

When countries start a war and then lose, there is no law, international or otherwise, that states that the winning country must hand back to the loser lands lost in battle.4 Egypt started a war with Israel and lost the Sinai, but Israel later bartered it in a trade for peace with Egypt. (We’ll see how that plays out with whatever new regime emerges from the ouster of Hosni Mubarak.) Syria started a war with Israel and lost the Golan Heights. Jordan started a war with Israel and lost Judea and Samaria. No other country has ever been expected to either return land won in a defensive war or to settle the refugees of the country that lost the war. Those Arabs whose countries lost wars can either accept the rule of the winning side, or they are free to relocate to any other region or country willing to accept them. It is not Israel’s duty to provide any manner of aid. But, in fact, Israel does aid these refugees, the only perpetual refugees known in recorded history.


1   http://www.mythsandfacts.com/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm
2   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917#Text_of_the_declaration       
3  http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2FCA2C68106F11AB05256BCF007BF3CB
4  http://www.mythsandfacts.org/article_view.asp?articleID=153

DOING THE TWIST -- NAKBA: Part 3 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of the term NAKBA, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.


Nakba means “catastrophe” in Arabic, and so present-day Arabs mourn the creation of the Jewish State of Israel as their “national catastrophe.” The real catastrophe for the Arabs was not the creation of Israel, but the ignominious failure of the Arab armies to drive the Jews into the sea. By the way, this was not the original “nakba” the Arabs experienced. It is worth citing Steven Plaut’s excellent article “How ‘Nakba’ proves there’s no Palestinian nation,”

“The term was not invented in 1948 but rather in 1920. And it was coined not because of Palestinians suddenly getting nationalistic but because Arabs living in Palestine regarded themselves as Syrians and were enraged at being cut off from their Syrian homeland…. The original “nakba” had nothing to do with Jews, and nothing to do with demands by Palestinian Arabs for self-determination, independence and statehood. To the contrary, it had everything to do with the fact that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians. They rioted at this nakba - at this catastrophe - because they found deeply offensive the very idea that they should be independent from Syria and Syrians.”*

* http://www.thejewishpress.com/pageroute.do/31503

DOING THE TWIST -- MILITANTS: Part 2 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of the term MILITANTS, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.

It is comforting to know that with one “global change” in reference databases, there are no longer terrorists anywhere in the world, unless they are certified members of Al Qaeda. All other terrorists have transmogrified into “militants,” “freedom fighters,” and “activists.” The fellows aboard the Mavi Marmara (attempting to break Israel’s perfectly legal sea blockade) in 2010 were “activists,” the so-called Palestinians are “freedom fighters,” and those masked men firing rockets into Israel from Gaza are “militants.”
Gee! Aren’t we all relieved to know that with one politically correct diktat thousands of terrorists were vaporized and morphed into people with some semblance of legitimacy attached to their acts of murder and mayhem?

DOING THE TWIST -- BORDERS: Part 1 of 7

The twisted terminology of Arabists have dominated the media for several decades and disinform children, youth and the general public via reference materials disseminated by highly respected publishers. The terms under discussion are found in online databases of Grolier, World Book, Gale, ABC-CLIO, and Facts on File. There are as well several well-known British publishers (Routledge, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Oxford University Press). Unfortunately, bias in publications from Great Britain can only be surprising in the breach. One leading indicator to a publisher’s dedication to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner is the language that is permitted, or not permitted, to be used in articles on these issues.

Following is a dissection of of the term BORDERS, in standard use by the above-mentioned publishers, that works to delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.

When is an armistice line a border? Only when referring to the 1949 armistice lines agreed upon by Jordan and Israel in their meeting in Rhodes. The Green Line, as it is referred to, is a temporary line indicating the locations of troops at the moment that a truce was claimed by both parties.* Firm boundaries, or borders, were to be negotiated. There has not to date been an agreed upon negotiation that establishes borders. Hence, the term “borders” has been consistently misused, delegitimizing the presence of Jewish settlers in what is, in fact, a disputed territory, and further implying an illegal occupation of legitimate areas of residence and oversight. Military presence is also appropriate, since a not insignificant number of Arab residents continue to plague Israel with suicide bombings, slaughter, and taking of hostages.


* http://www.uc4i.org/news/?p=6737     

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

JUDAISM, CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM IN WORLD BOOK ONLINE FOR KIDS

World Book Online for Kids is geared toward the audience of primary school children. These children are at a formative age in which information intake is deeply rooted in their memories for the rest of their lives.

What, then, are we to make of a “teaching” publication that does not provide an equal format, with comparable information, on the three major monotheistic religions of the world? Although the articles themselves are roughly equal in length [Judaism = 5 paragraphs, 24 lines, 254 words; Christianity = 3 paragraphs, 14 lines, 219 words;
Islam = 4 paragraphs, 23 lines, 265 words], the same cannot be said of their content.

JUDAISM

"Judaism." World Book Online For Kids. World Book, 2011. Web. 7 June 2011.

Paragraph 1

“Judaism <<JOO dee ihz uhm>> is the religion of the Jewish people. Judaism is the world's oldest major religion.”

Judaism is NOT the world’s oldest major religion; it IS the world’s oldest major monotheistic religion. Hinduism (third largest religion in the modern world) is the world’s oldest major religion.1

Paragraph 2

“The Messiah will bring the Jews together, lead them in God's way, and defeat their enemies.”

There is absolutely nothing in the Torah, the Talmud or the Ten Commandments to suggest that the Messiah will “defeat” the “enemies” of the Jews. This clause is a gratuitous addition to attach a bellicose element to the concept of the Messiah and to the Judaic belief system. In fact, Jews pray three times daily for the messianic appearance that anticipates the following: “ingathering of the exiles [to Israel]; restoration of the religious courts of justice [in Israel]; an end of wickedness, sin and heresy; reward to the righteous; rebuilding of Jerusalem; restoration of the line of King David; and restoration of Temple service.”2

 Paragraph 5

“The Talmud is a guide to the laws that Jewish people are supposed to live by.”

The operative phrase in the sentence is “supposed to,” the implication being that some, or many, or most Jews do not observe the Talmudic laws. When compared with the article on Islam, there is no suggestion in that article that a single Muslim does not adhere faithfully to all of Islam’s laws (the Five Pillars of Islam).
  
Notable Omissions
1)      Abraham
The article on Judaism does not mention a single individual in connection with the origins of Judaism. One would have thought that Abraham, the Patriarch of Judaism, was deserving of mention. In comparison, the article on Christianity provides information on Jesus, and the article on Islam certainly discusses Muhammad.

2)      Moses
There is no mention of Moses who, according to the Old Testament, received the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai.

3)      The Ten Commandments
The Ten Commandments might as well not have been written since one finds no mention of them in this article, which certainly does not list them. However, in the article on Islam, one finds not only mention of the Five Pillars of Islam, but also definitions of each pillar.

4)      Jewish symbol
In the article on Islam, one learns that “The symbol of Islam is a crescent, or a thin moon, and a star.” There is no mention of a Jewish symbol (Star of David)3 or Christian symbol (cross) in the articles on Judaism and Christianity. Would you be surprised to learn that, in fact, the star-and-crescent was the most common Jewish symbol4 during the Middle Ages?

CHRISTIANITY

"Christianity." World Book Online For Kids. World Book, 2011. Web. 7 June 2011.

The World Book Online article on Christianity states “Some Christians believe that Jesus was only a great human teacher” but neglects to mention which Christian sect or sects that might include.
  
Notable Omissions
  1. There is no mention that the building where Christians worship is called a church, although both synagogues and mosques are mentioned as the houses of worship for Jews and Muslims.
  2. Omitted also is the information that the major Christian symbol is a cross.
  3. The New Testament – Christianity’s contribution of the New Testament to the Bible (which previously comprised only the Old Testament)  – garners not even a passing mention, even though the Torah is mentioned in the article on Judaism and the Koran appears in the article on Islam. Mention of the Bible itself is also missing in action.
 

ISLAM

"Islam." World Book Online For Kids. World Book, 2011. Web. 7 June 2011.

 Paragraph 1
 “There are many Muslims in parts of Europe and several million in the United States.”
In fact, there are not “several million” Muslims in the United States. According to a 2007 Pew Research Center study,5 Islam represents 0.6 percent of the American population; that percentage provides a figure of approximately 1.8 million American Muslims. In 2008, the American Religious Identification Survey6 provided an even lower estimate of 1,349,000 American Muslims. Unless there has been an unprecedented reproduction rate plus immigration rate of Muslims in and to America, “several million” seems a pretty astonishing figure.
  
Paragraph 2

“Islam was first preached by an Arab prophet, or holy man, named Muhammad. In about A.D. 610, he began to receive messages from Allah, or God.”

Here we find the first mention of a “prophet,” although both Judaism and Christianity, antecedent religions to Islam, are replete with prophets. Also of interest is the firm statement that “he began to receive messages” as a piece of factual information. While it may be true that Muslims believe this to be factual, non-Muslims may question the veracity of the statement. One might more accurately say, “Muslims believe that Muhammad received messages from Allah.”
  
CONCLUSION

Neither the authors nor the editors coordinated efforts to provide even-handed treatment of the three major monotheistic religions currently practiced. The editors, especially, were MIA in what one presumes is or should be part of their job description. World Book Online for Kids receives a grade of D for its coverage of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_symbolism
4Friedenberg, Daniel M. Medieval Jewish Seals from Europe. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

STARTING SMALL

The following paragraph is one publisher's (ABC-CLIO) introduction to the text of UN Resolution 181 on the partition of Palestine (1947). It contains 115 words in 4 sentences on 9 lines. How bad could it be? What could go amiss? What could one possibly find offensive in such a brief statement? In a word: plenty.

United Nations: resolution on the partition of Palestine (1947)
 On November 29, 1947, the United Nations (UN) adopted this resolution, number 181, calling for the partition of the former British colony of Palestine into two separate nations: Israel for Jews and Palestine for Arabs. The effort was designed to answer calls for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, particularly after the horrors suffered by the world's Jewish population during the Holocaust. However, Palestinian Arabs adamantly rejected the UN resolution and refused to contemplate such a division of their country. Jews in the region ignored Palestinian protests and declared their portion of Palestine the independent nation of Israel in 1948, sparking the first of many Arab-Israeli wars in the second half of the 20th century. 

"United Nations: resolution on the partition of Palestine (1947)." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2011. Web. 17 June 2011.

The first sentence is a statement of fact. From there, the direction is downhill. There is no context for the phrase “answer calls” – what calls? who called? I have no idea; do you? The second part of that sentence, “particularly after the horrors [of the] Holocaust,” suggests that the impetus to form a Jewish state was a direct result of the Holocaust. Not true. This ignores  (1) the continuous history of Jewish residence in the area, (2) the Dreyfus Affair [1894] and the Kishinev pogrom [1903] which, between them, sparked the development of the Zionist movement, (3) the Balfour Declaration of 1917, and (4) the Mandate for Palestine of 1922.

While it is true that the Arabs rejected the UN resolution, the reference to “their country” is a falsehood of the first magnitude.  The implication is that (1) all Arabs living in Palestine in 1947 were native to the area, and (2) the area was recognized as a political entity under Arab rule. Both inferences are incorrect. Many, and likely a majority, of the Arabs living in Palestine in 1947 had emigrated from other Arab lands as the Jews created infrastructure and employment opportunities. Palestine was never itself an Arab polity; the only direct rule on the land was that of the Jews prior to the fall of the Second Temple in 70 CE.

In the next sentence we read the following: “the Jews ignored Palestinian protests.” In fact, there were no “Palestinians” in 1947, other than the Jews. The Arabs were not calling themselves “Palestinians” until after the 1967 war. As for the Arab protests, according to historian Barbara W. Tuchman, “All the Arab claims of later years cannot conceal the fact that both the old Sherif Hussein and Feisal, the active leader, were cognizant of and acquiesced in the exclusion of Palestine from the area of their promised independence, whether or not they had any mental reservations. Even after the British intention to make room in Palestine for the Jews was made public they did not take exception.” [Bible and Sword, p. 329].

In the same sentence mentioned in the previous paragraph, the author refers to “their [the Palestinians’] portion of Palestine.” The Arab portion of Palestine, according to the Palestine Mandate, was east of the Jordan River (Transjordan, presently known as Jordan). In fact, the Mandate called for close settlement of Jews on the land west of the Jordan River.

The final portion of the last sentence, “sparking the first of many Arab-Israeli wars,” implies that the wars were the fault of the Jews for declaring the Jewish State of Israel in 1948. The Arabs had been slaughtering Jews in Palestine long before 1948; the year 1929 saw Arab massacres of Jews in Hebron and Safed, two of the four most holy Jewish cities in the region. In fact, the “many Arab-Israeli wars” were initiated by the Arabs, with the Israelis fighting primarily defensive actions (with the exception of preemptive actions in Gaza and Lebanon).

The publishers state that “Unlike other databases that aggregate information without context, Issues, Release 2.0 offers the complete historical background and contemporary status of each issue and also provides supporting facts, figures, and timelines.” I hope that statement reassures you!

Friday, June 17, 2011

A NEW HISTORY FOR A NEW CENTURY

In 2011, Gale Cengage Learning (a Gale product) offered free access to their online resources April 10-24, in celebration of National Library Week. I am a retired librarian, and this notice piqued my interest as many of these resources were not available at my final library assignment.  Further, it had been some years since my assignments involved reviewing reference materials for acquisition. I was familiar with the major titles and the venerable and venerated publishers, but not with the “new history” contained in the “current and updated” articles.

My first venture was into Cengage’s Global Issues in Context, and I started with their Overview article on Israel. The only paragraphs that did not demand revision were those dealing with latitude and longitude and the description of the physical features of the country.

I contacted the Managing Editor and provided a critique of the article. The article was reviewed and, indeed, revised. While the revised article still has some problems, it is much improved from the original.

But, that is one article amongst many, and I found roughly half a dozen additional problem articles in that resource. Cengage also publishes other resources, including Opposing Viewpoints. I found the same problems with articles on Israel and the Middle East in that publication.

In reviewing the article on Israel in World Book Online I found similar misrepresentations of Israel, both in tone and in content. (World Book has reviewed this article and changed one entire word). ABC-CLIO, another publisher of reference materials, produces Issues: Understanding Controversy & Society. Ditto to the problems in Gale and World Book.

The editors with whom I communicated at Gale and World Book were cordial, concerned and responsive. However, they did not appear anxious to have me critique all the “questionable” articles in their publications.

As well, I perceive this as the tip of the iceberg. There are at present roughly half a dozen to a dozen major players in reference publishing, and they appear to be interconnected. Consequently, the flavor of their products is quite similar.

Added to the monotone color of the publishers is the issue of their advisory boards, editors and authors that provide “expertise” acquired from Saudi and Iranian funded Middle East Studies programs in America’s colleges and universities.

Lest you think that my statement is unduly critical, the following are opening sentences from three separate articles from ABC-CLIO’s Issues: Understanding Controversy & Society:

(1)   “The country of Israel, located in the volatile Middle East, has actively engaged in espionage throughout its history.” (article on “Israel”)

(2)   “The state of Israel often strikes specific terror suspects from helicopters and gun ships, and many times innocent people are killed.” (article on “International Terrorism: Outlook”)

(3)   “Palestine is a historical area of the Middle East now largely within the boundaries of the Jewish state of Israel.” (article on “Palestine”)

I will be posting articles from these and other online reference resources and critiquing each article. Stay tuned!