Any anyone is suprised at this?

Bad publicity is still publicity!

sounds like a good book i might even buy it even though i am not a fan of his

#3 jimmytheclaw

GMTA: I just ordered it.

Shamelessly plagiating sources like Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial (Chicago, JKAP Publications, 1984) didn't help maybe?

But I'm sure you can prove Alexander Cockburn wrong?

mr pol

get the e-version share with us poor individuals or at least scan and post some good stuff from it

If they review it in their usual illiterate sound-bite fashion, the cumulative effect will be to destroy their credibility.

PS Another Latuff cartoon of one of those self-hating Jews, Norman Finkelstein. It says something about Finkelstein that he thinks this is an accurate and flattering portrait of himself.

oh and dont forget to leave a good review at amazon

OT

fox is talking about dennis miller running for office now that would be a good ambassador for saudi arabia

It hardly matters, vermin cannot read and the American left has abandoned Israel.

Yeah, there was something at idiotmedia the other day accusing Prof. Dershowitz of plagirism. Whatever. They'll do anything to discredit him. They sure can't debate him on the merits.

Utterly, completely OT but funny as hell:

BOSTON — A restless gorilla broke out of its zoo enclosure Sunday . . . . The gorilla escaped from the Franklin Park Zoo minutes before the zoo was scheduled to close . . . A witness told police she later saw the gorilla sitting at a bus stop on a street near the zoo.

That's one smart gorilla. Wonder where he was going to take the bus? :)

#6 jimmytheclaw

The e-version is not available on Amazon.fr.

Shamelessly plagiating sources like Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial (Chicago, JKAP Publications, 1984) didn't help maybe?

Dershowitz is synthesizing a number of sources - he's not a historian, he's a popularizer. You can't say he's "plagiating" Peters by coming to the same conclusions she did or using her source material.

It's "plagarism," not "plagiating." Please use a dictionary in the future, m'kay?)

Has Cockburn been right about anything?

Has Cockburn been right about anything?

No.

That decrepit old Stalinist is worse than Edward Said.

We both need a dictionary: It's plagiarizing. I can only judge from the snippets Cockburn provides but if a student tried the same he'd be out of college pretty soon. Sorry. Maybe read for yourself but the snippets are quite telling.

I'm saying this in good faith btw.

Alan Dershowitz, Plagiarist

Hilarious.

One negative reviewer had a long list of additional books on the Middle east he had also reviewed.

They must have all been "pro-Israel" because he gave them all 1/5 stars.

But of course we know it's not the books he has the problem with, it's history.

#5 Counterpunch Reader

Shamelessly plagiating sources

Apparently coining new words is a survival trait of Counterpunch "readers" too. Or perhaps you meant plagiarizing?

We both need a dictionary: It's plagiarizing.

Depends on which side of the pond you're on dufus.

I'm saying this in good faith btw.

Hmmmm - Counterpunch reader / good faith? Can we say mutually exclusive? How about oxymoronic, the moronic aspect heavily emphasized of course?

#17 NTropy

Did you read the article he linked to? It shows that parts of Joan Peters' From Time Immemorial have been shamelessly ripped off. I'm still going to read Dershowitz' book, just because I don't trust anybody who flames a pro-Israel book - but if true, plagiarizing Joan Peters is unacceptable.

It is possible to read the Daily Telegraph and the Independent without being a moron. Some people just prefer to get a wider variety of opinions.

And some people are not native English speakers. But they will look up words in a dictionary if asked to.

Cockburn is a piece of garbage. He has no accociation with Liberals in this country. If anyone here has read Eric Altermans book you can vouch for his distaste of the man.

It's silly to get into pissing contests with other posters, especially if its about a typo. Even if they're trolls.

I suppose for you a troll is anyone posting something you don't like.

#18 - All I saw was that they used the same sources.

#19 - Could you please explain to us what that complete non sequitur is supposed to mean?

Could anyone ask for a better example of the ad hominem? Because our counterpunch friend and his source, Cockburn, cannot refute Deshowitz' arguments, they attack him for .::gasp::. plagiarism! Because his ideas are not entirely original, they are invalid? You're grasping at straws.

I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of the negative reviews are by asshats that have not read the book.

cockburn is a faux working class british fop running away from the dick he unconsciosly desires to be placed in his ass straight into the arms of oppression and totalitarianism--probably has bad teeth too!!

unconsciously--preview, mongol,preview

Whenever a poltical book, from either side of the political spectrum, comes out on amazon there are tons of people who write one sentance reviews and give it either 1 or 5 stars to affect the overall rating. As far as I'm concerned this post on LGF means absoliutly NOTHING.

While I'd hammer Dershowitz if the accusations are substantiated, surely leftists will defend and admire him the same way they do Doris Kearns Goodwin. Out of principle, of course.

Ginger Liz, he doesn't just "use the same sources", he quotes them exactly the way Peters quotes them (with the same omissions and the same comments).

"Amidst this orgy of plagiarism, Dershowitz understandably gets confused about sources . Claiming to be inspired by George Orwell, in her book Peters coined the term "turnspeak" to signal an inversion of reality. Dershowitz is apparently so nervous of citing Peters in any way that he credits the term "turnspeak" to Orwell, accusing critics of Israel of "deliberately using George Orwell's 'turnspeak'".

How can he quote something out of a book he claims he never used?

Again, a college student would not get away with this. That's why websites like Turn it In have become popular with professors.

#22 Counterpunch Reader 9/28/2003 10:38PM PST

I suppose for you a troll is anyone posting something you don't like.

No, but if you read Counterpunch, you probably are. And if you use that as your moniker, you most certainly are.

#24 Spiny Norman

Because the article recommends at the same time From Time Immemorial, it is clearly not an anti-semitic/zionist/Israel attack. If what the article says is true, Dershowitz owes an apology to Joan Peters.

#29 Counterpunch Reader
#30 Neo_Con

What is "Counterpunch"?

This isn't new to Amazon. There is not Arab Propaganda Machine attacking Dershowitz!!! This happens with ALL popular books

Sounds like an interesting book though...

Fight lies with truth folks. Read the book, then write a thoughtful review. That's what I'm going to do.

If anything Dirsh was overly harsh in criticizm of Israel and too easy on the Pals.

Counterpunch is a Leftist rag, or more like a rant.

Ginger Liz, he doesn't just "use the same sources", he quotes them exactly the way Peters quotes them (with the same omissions and the same comments).

Would you care to find the original pieces from which they both quote - I have a feeling that the omitted words are quite possibly irrelevant. Like your comments about the Torygraph and the Independent. WTF?!

#18 Mr Pol

I'm reading the article right now. So far, Joan Peters and Alan Dershowitz have apparently used the same source with little variation. If that means plagiarism, well, yeah that sucks.

I've always found it curious when a person has to preface a statement with the following though:

I'm saying this in good faith btw.

As for you Counterpunch Reader, I refuse to label you a troll unless or until you prove that you are one. I hate that label. I'm well aware of the Counterpunch reputation and content however. It makes me instantly suspicious of anybody posting here that is a regular denizen there.

#36 Neo_Con

Oh, OK. That's why you have a problem with "Counterpunch Reader" nick :-)

#37 Ginger Liz

The "turnspeak" part is damning - and it's not only the quotes, but also the comments that are identical.

Anyway, I highly recommend Joan Peters From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine. The first two comments on the page tell it all...

Well, I've put both books on my wish list and forwarded it to Mummy!

(And a new copy of Scarface as my brother has just split, acrimoniously, with his fiancee . . . round whose flat he left my DVD!)

Mr Pol, please show me where I mentioned anything about a "anti-semitic/zionist/Israel attack".

Personally speaking, I detest Dershowitz, especially after the OJ Simpson trial. A shameless publicity hound.

BTW, OT: Hesiod is having a fit of juvenile name-calling, so if we have an influx of Angry Mice™, you'll know where they came from.

#40 Ginger Liz

Arabs and anti-semites hate Joan Peters' book. In particular, Edward Said hated both the book and the author. I can't think of any higher praise :-)

Well sorry, it was my first posting here and I couldn't come up with a better nick. Will try to find a better one if I chose to post here more often.

I suppose you wouldn't think that somebody who goes by the nick "Hulugu" is a Mongol in real life?

Plagiarism can be done in many ways. You can literally quote someone without giving your source. What Dershowitz did is "source mining". Mrs Peters put a lot of work in investigating all her sources. Then years later somebody just takes these sources and pretends he came up with them himself. And he says that he didn't rely on anything in her book.

I don't say Cockburn "proves" Dershowitz' plagiarism with his article yet but what he quotes would be enough for any academic institution (and certainly for Mrs Peters) to demand an investigation. Students are strongly discouraged to do this kind of "data mining". Of course you have to do a thorough comparison of the two books to come to a valid conclusion.

If Dershowitz does these kind of things he makes himself very vulnerable to attacks and defeats the purpose of his book.

from the comments:

The United States on the other hand as an occupier of Iraq is expected to spend about 190 Billion the first year to improve Iraqis life. How much Israel did spend since the occupation 0f 1948 ? Nothing, Zero. As a matter of fact they Tax the Palestinian population at higher rate than they tax the Jewish population

obviously this is a bullshit. but does someone have numbers to back it up? i know israel has spent lots of money on the palestinian infrastructure.

#42 Spiny Norman

Mr Pol, please show me where I mentioned anything about a "anti-semitic/zionist/Israel attack".

You didn't: I did. You said:

Because his ideas are not entirely original, they are invalid?

What I meant is that the article does not attack the ideas or the facts. It says Dershowitz plagiarized Peters, and recommends Peters' book. So it is not an anti-semitic/zionist/Israel attack against the ideas or the facts. Just an attack against Dershowitz.

Personally speaking, I detest Dershowitz, especially after the OJ Simpson trial. A shameless publicity hound.

So the article is probably right... I'm still going to check by myself, though.

#44 Counterpunch Reader

My post on this thread applies to you as well. Apologies for being too quick out of the jerk gate. I reserve the right to remain suspicious though. ;-)

#47 NTropy

...and this applies here, too.

#46,

the coutnerpunch article calls Peters a fraud. does anyone have any opinion or info on this? did our recently departed pal Edward Said actually debunk anything, or just say that israel blows chunks?

the author of the counterpunch article cites Said and chris hitchens, so i gotta take it with a grain of salt. sure thats bad debate technique, but when each side disagrees on reality...

#45 Tupsox,

I don't think Israel taxes Palestinians at all. I may be wrong, but doesn't the PA tax its 'subjects', while Israel collects the tax on PA's behalf, or at least used to? Can somebody confirm that?

#49 Tupsox

the coutnerpunch article calls Peters a fraud.

Ah, I didn't see that?

Edward Said wrote a propaganda book against Joan Peters, yes. IMO he succeeded in proving her right.

#49 Tupsox 9/28/2003 11:31PM PST

the coutnerpunch article calls Peters a fraud. does anyone have any opinion or info on this?

Joan Peters' book consists of 90% primary sources, so it's pretty hard to make a case of "fraud".

But to paleos, any book is a "fraud" that paints a picture the palestinians can't live with.

#51,

towards the bottom. something about one fraud ripping off another.

what of peters writing and facts did people say was made up?

#53 Tupsox

Said accused Peters of misusing quotes, taking them out of context and over-relying on anecdotal evidence. In other words, he accused Peters of "pulling a Said".

...and Said and Finkelstein both criticized Peters' use of statistical data, more or less saying that they didn't understand the maths behind it so it was worthless.

I doubt that Peter's book could be called a fraud. If I read it right it is a very polemic commented collection of sources that has received harsh criticism, obviously from respectable scholars (I don't know how respectable Professor Yehoshua Porath is, you might know better).

But with the "right" sources you can pretty much "prove" anything. Or nothing. At least Peters took the trouble finding them herself.

The Joan Peters book is an impressive compilation of historical and primary sources that simply can't be refuted. I can't imagine how Edward Said would have proved the book a "fraud", when to do so he would have had to prove the primary sources as frauds.

And the book consists of almost 90% primary sources, much of it going back to the 1800s. You tell me how Edward Said could prove the writers of those docs were "biased"!

How can they be biased about a conflict that hadn't even happened yet? That's why the book is so powerful, because the sources are so reliable. And that's why it's been slandered by the anti-Israel crowd.

#55 The artist formerly known as Counterpunch Reader

Nice nick :-)

Once the rabid antisemites are taken out, there are two valid criticisms of Peters' work. The first, obvious one is that she doesn't give the Christian Dhimmi population, which was consistently around 8-10% in the area, the importance it deserves. The second valid criticism is that she relies on statistical data from Ottoman tax records and census - and we are told that Arabs always cheated a lot.

#57 Mr Pol:

The second valid criticism is that she relies on statistical data from Ottoman tax records and census - and we are told that Arabs always cheated a lot.

I haven't read the Peters book, so I'm not aware of how she uses her sources.

However, I do know from having read on of Bat Ye'or's books that she uses primary sources extensively (and includes them in indicies at the end of said book) to prove how oppressive both Arab and Ottoman Muslim taxation systems were for the dhimmi, both Jew and Christian.

OT: Shana Tova! :)

#57 Mr Pol 9/28/2003 11:57PM PST

The second valid criticism is that she relies on statistical data from Ottoman tax records and census - and we are told that Arabs always cheated a lot.

Criticism of the Turkish census information, if that's all Joan Peters used, might be valid.

But the fact that so much additional information supports that very census data, makes the criticism invalid.

Mark Twain had no reason to lie. British army officers had no reason to lie. Turkish census takers had every reason to get the information right.

#58 someguy

Antisemites basically say that any figure involving Muslims must be multiplied by 100 because Arabs cheated on their taxes. Or maybe it's 1,000. Or 10,000. Or whatever they need to "prove" their point. IIRC Peters did not adjust the basic figures at all, she used them as she found them. For an Arab, that's "bias".

Self-hating Jew watch:

http://english.daral...

Mr Pol,

In referrence your link to Ntropy's comment, I know what's bugging me, and it's made me more than a little testy: I have loathed that Stalinist prick Alexander Cockburn ever since a vicious column he wrote on the 50th anniversay of D-Day that was published in the LA Times. The bastard had the gall to call the Normandy Invasion the first shot of the Cold War and an attack against the Soviets; it's sole purpose was to keep the Red Army out of western Europe, you see. Never mind that his hero Uncle Joe had been haranguing Churchill and FDR for two friggin' years to open a second front in France (Italy wasn't what he wanted)... And get this: he went on to say the atomic bombing of Japan was genocidal act of desperation, that the US, in fact, had no chance of defeating Japan and it was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria that won the Pacific War. Never mind the fact that the Imperial Govt. was unaware of the Soviet actions until after they'd decided to surrender (and put down an Army revolt, see Toland, The Rising Sun)...

I could go on and on, but you get the point. I'm still pissed off after 9 years.

To the artist formerly known as counterpunch reader... my apologies for being hasty, I hope you understand.

We all know Arabs have to lie to make their case, and I find it deliciously ironic that they have to ADMIT they lie to prove Joan Peters wrong.

Of course, now that the thread has returned to its original topic, my post seems entirely absurd.

Very detailed critique of Peters' book, including comments by Daniel Pipes, who called it "appallingly crafted."

That rat Finkelstein has also tried his hand at trashing the book, see my post here: http://littlegreenfo...

#59 Neo_Con

Criticism of the Turkish census information, if that's all Joan Peters used, might be valid.

No, that's not the only statistical data she used, and yes, it is still valid criticism. Even today census data is not 100% correct - and the mathematical methods used to adjust raw census data are way too complex for most mathematicians, as well as for me. We all know there is a margin of error in Ottoman census data, the only question is how big is that margin. Peters chose to avoid the issue by using the figures as if they were correct, and not adjust them. While this is, IMO, the only way to avoid introducing additional errors, it means her figures could be off by 20-25% between two census. Note that a 50% error in favor of the Arabs would still not invalid her thesis.

The other thing to keep in mind is that, for tax purposes, the province was subdivided into 5 regions. The boundaries of those regions changed slightly over time, then 4 regions were partitioned away in 1922. This makes the whole statistical analysis a lot more complex, probably way too complex for the average Arab academic :-)

#61 - If you're referring to Berg, he's a bit more complex. He wrote this piece for the Arab newspaper of Jerusalem, confronting the pathology of his "Palestinian friends" in harsh language.

Neo Con (16),

That would be my friend, Giant Panda. I think it's a "she".

#62 Spiny Norman

I wasn't aware of that. But it proves NTropy is smarter than either of us. I feel better about admitting it now :-)

#62 Spiny Norman, that would indeed be one of the most stupid lines I have ever heard about Normandy. I probably won't be a regular reader of Counterpunch ;)

May I tell you something interesting I found out about forums of different political leanings. If you post a dissenting comment you get attacked easily and called a troll or whatever. But if you post more and show that you can prove your point there are forums that will accept it.

The leftist forums will still call you a troll. That's the difference.

Now let me just find a shorter nick...lol

#65 Yehudit 9/29/2003 12:13AM PST

Very detailed critique of Peters' book, including comments by Daniel Pipes, who called it "appallingly crafted."

"Such embarrassing concessions by the book's prominent defenders raise valid doubts about its integrity. On the other hand, both Sanders and Pipes still defend Peters' central thesis."

Charles, this is big news - did you blog it while I wasn't looking? if not, I think it deserves a post.

Neo_Con 9/29/2003 12:22AM PST

I know, but read the whole thing - some of her arguments aren't well-supported. Anyway, I hope Dershowitz is using the parts that are defensible.

Agreed. I should've known better, because the very mention of his name makes me see red, no pun intended (???).

;^)

#74 Yehudit 9/29/2003 12:25AM PST

I know, but read the whole thing - some of her arguments aren't well-supported. Anyway, I hope Dershowitz is using the parts that are defensible.

I have read the book, and what I remember most clearly was how fact intense it was. As far as her "arguments", that's the author's editorializing, like in any book. You are free to agree with her, or disagree, as in any book.

But the facts (sources and documents) are provided so that YOU can draw your own conclusions, and that's what's great about this book.

To The artist formerly known as Counterpunch Reader-

May I tell you something interesting I found out about forums of different political leanings. If you post a dissenting comment you get attacked easily and called a troll or whatever. But if you post more and show that you can prove your point there are forums that will accept it. The leftist forums will still call you a troll. That's the difference.

Intriguing, especially because it confirms what I already believed. Good job sticking around to prove non-trollitude. I believe it's Tim Dunkin (?) that's been handing out Roman nicks, if you want one of those. Or you can be another Paul, we have 4 or 5 of those already and you can get into conversations with them on every other thread about how you all use the nickname Paul and how that is confusing. It's great fun on a regular basis! :-)

btw, Hi everyone! Whatta football day...Great Colts, Titans, Texans games.

You forgot the Vikings. 4-0.

#65 Yehudit

Interesting article. I will answer it all with one question. If Peters' thesis is really that wrong, why did the Arab League in 1948 insist that Arabs living in the Mandated territory for two years or more be considered "refugees", instead of the normal, UNHCR definition?

Neo_Con-didn't watch that one but saw the hilite reels many times over...Poor TO/niners! Kick ass Randy.

the artist in search of a shorter nick,

May I tell you something interesting I found out about forums of different political leanings. If you post a dissenting comment you get attacked easily and called a troll or whatever. But if you post more and show that you can prove your point there are forums that will accept it.

I think most of the regulars here would agree with you, most, but not all, which is to be expected. Words like "racist," "fascist" and the like tend to set people off, but reasonable, not pedantic, arguments are more likely to touch off a lively discussion, which is what this thread has become.

Leftist blogs tend to attract "true believers" that insist on rigid adherence to the "cause".

The funnest one was the Colts though...it was like God decided to humiliate the poor Saints...they (commentators) talked about how Peyton needed to bestow attention on a lot of constituencies on the team, and how he kind of owed Marvin Harrison some nice passes by now...Boy did he ever get some-esp that one he tipped to himself. Wow.

#77 evariste

Or you can be another Paul, we have 4 or 5 of those already and you can get into conversations with them on every other thread about how you all use the nickname Paul and how that is confusing. It's great fun on a regular basis! :-)

You mean like this:

Bruce: Gentleman, I'd like to introduce a chap from Pommeyland who is joinin' us this year in the philosophy department at the University of Wooloomooloo.

Everybruce: G'day!

Michael Baldwin: Hello.

Bruce: Michael Baldwin, Bruce. Michael Baldwin, Bruce. Michael Baldwin, Bruce.

Bruce: Is your name not Bruce?

Michael: No, it's Michael.

Bruce: That's going to cause a bit of confusion.

Bruce: Mind if we call you "Bruce" to keep it clear?

Wouldn't be great fun to have a thread where literally everyone posted as "Paul"?

#84 Spiny Norman

Wouldn't be great fun to have a thread where literally everyone posted as "Paul"?

I guess my sense of humor is defective.

The artist formerly known as Counterpunch Reader

I guess you're not so bad after all. ;-)

But I'm still curious as to the crack about the newspapers!

#78 evariste

Did you happen to see a bit of the USA-NK World Cup match on ABC earlier today?

I loathe soccer.

But I tuned in because I'm curious about North Koreans---have you seen any aside from the embassy gate-crashers?----

Anyway, did you see how the NK players were almost the same size as the Americans? That fucking freaked me out. The average North Korean man is shorter than the average North American woman. So you'd think the NK players would be proportionally small. Obviously the NK players were fed well, unlike their 4'6" sisters who have to scrounge for fucking bugs in the grass. The conventional wisdom is that NKers are on average seven inches shorter than their SK counterparts.

I wonder if Kim Jong Il has his drones roam the countryside looking for genetically-exceptional tykes, and then has them snatch said tykes, to be brought-up in some sort of government hell-hole "school".

aka The artist formerly known...

#86 Ginger Liz, are you referring to this quote?

"It is possible to read the Daily Telegraph and the Independent without being a moron. Some people just prefer to get a wider variety of opinions."

It was just an example for two papers which couldn't differ more politically. I guess LGF is as far removed from Counterpunch as the Telegraph is from the Independent. Yet you took the trouble reading that CP article and after that (some of) you found out that I'm not a troll. So even the (occasional) reading of "red" publications can do something good. :)

As for the nick... well it wont get much shorter but I always wanted to use that line somewhere. So the artist is now known as "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition"

#88 Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition

Oh, no... another Monty Python fan...

OT: and the hits just keep on coming for CAIR

http://frontpagemag....

It's interesting to read how the tenor of this thread has changed from the issue of Dershowitz's alleged plagarism to the validity of Peter's book. For those of you who haven't read her landmark work, it is truly a primer on the Middle East.

As to her facts/sources no one has refuted them. A couple of years ago, I did some "random" fact checking on some of her citations. They were 100% accurate.

Criticisms of her work stem mainly from the "usual suspects" and have little merit. Several years ago, Ms. Peters did an interview on WND.

To the question about the press coverage in the Middle East, she replied "It's more than politically correct. It means they don't report an Israeli who has been murdered. They don't report the reason for an Arab slaughter of Israelis. They report it as though it was an Israeli provocation."

True then and true now.

#88 - You know you're only going to get called NETSI!

I take it that you're from the UK, from your choice of papers for the comparison - I just didn't understand where you were coming from: I can't think of ANYONE who'd read both of those!

If Peters' thesis is really that wrong, why did the Arab League in 1948 . . .

The article doesn't claim her thesis was "wrong," but certain parts of it are not supported by the data as she reasoned from it. None of the criticisms here are addressing the points made in the article.

Wasn't Peters on assignment for Vanity Fair or another magazine to write a pro-pali piece when she wrote FTI?

Oh, and I forgot, if you want to read Yehoshua's review on her book, make sure you hold your barf bag near.

This radical anti-Israel Israeli is a piece of work. Give close attention to his discussion of Dhimmis - this guy is so out there, he makes Hitler seem moderate. Read his references.

Elsewhere, Indymediots from the ficticious nation of "aotearoa" (known by everyone else as "New Zealand"), are eulogising the late Edward "Stoney" Said. Good for a laugh.

I'm going to vomit.....someone on the CBC praising Edward Said....Marcus Yuseph....a playwrite. Typical

#73 Yehudit:

There is a theory going around (not about dinosaurs - for you Monty Python fans) but about Saudia Arabia and Iraq. The ruling family in Saudia Arabia wanted to get the US troops out of SA for their own internal political reasons but they were afraid of Saddam's Iraq. The war was the solution to their problem.

The proof - that the troops are now pulling out.

Also note all those mysterious meetings between President Bush and various high ranking Saudi officials.

#77 - evariste
What's all this about us Pauls? If I used the name the way the locals in Arabia used it I would be Mr. Ball. Mind you, I think your nick is marvelous:

The significant contributions of Evariste Galois (1811-1832) to the foundation of mathematical group theory were not widely recognized until many years after his untimely death in a duel in 1832. On the eve of his death he entrusted a resume of the mathematical ideas and writings that occopied his mind, including the discovery of the connection of the theory of groups with the solution of equations by radicals, to his friend Auguste Chevalier. These were not published for over 14 years.

*awaits the Seething from CAIR for the latest charges against it*

OT: as an aside, I found this rather interesting interview on Merde in France this morning.

http://merdeinfrance...

I just finished "The Case for Israel" on the train this morning. The book is certainly a a valuable resource.

My bias against terrorists and their defenders aside, the comments on Amazon.com are typical of any book that tackles a highly provocative issue. What's distressing is the fact that the book itself is given a lower star rating. Certainly the objectively aspired individual can find value in "The Case for Israel" to give it its deserved rating as well as recommend other titles that present a different point of view.

Take these comments from "a reader in San Antonio".

He[Dersh] tried to portray the Israeli government as the victim in this situation; However Israel is the only occupier power in the history of man kind that did not assume responsibility about eh people they are occupying. The United States on the other hand as an occupier of Iraq is expected to spend about 190 Billion the first year to improve Iraqis life. How much Israel did spend since the occupation 0f 1948 ? Nothing, Zero. As a matter of fact they Tax the Palestinian population at higher rate than they tax the Jewish population. Not to mention land confiscating and the creation of settlements in the occupied territories.

It's routine to hear from Marxists and their various political off shoots that the reason the Palestinian side does not get equal airtime in the Western Media is due to the fact that Noam Chomsky isn't invited onto television as much as he should be. For some, holocaust denial is an accreditation deserving of stature. Sadistical knowledge demands more attention.

As for Cockburn, R&R; from Stalinists defending their "master race" is nothing new. What else do you expect from a commentary source called "counterpunch"?

Look what Cockburn uses to open his diatribe.
On page 213 we meet Dershowitz, occupant of the Felix Frankfurter chair at Harvard Law School, happily walloping a French prof called Faurisson, charged by the FF prof from Harvard U as being a fraud and a holocaust denier: "There was no extensive historical research. Instead there was the fraudulent manufacturing of false antihistory. It was the kind of deception for which professors are rightly fired--not because their views are controversial, but because they are violating the most basic canons of historical scholarship.."
In the context as Dersh makes this statement it is to follow up Dersh's critique of Noam Chomsky using Professor Faurisson's "faked" research in order to make a case for holocast denial.

We should all start clapping for Cockburn, but don't be the first one to stop clapping or you might get "Stalinized".

#100 Paul (aka Jewels/Julian)
Thanks. From your link:

There are those who will fight totalitarian Islamism on the side of the free world, and those who have already slipped under the control of the oil kingdoms and Islamic killers, represented by a 'French Council of Islam' whose direction is composed of leaders belonging to radical organisations favorable to charia law. Let me quickly remind you of a few figures: in 2002 11% of the French population is Muslim. The middle term projections are: more than double the figure in 15 years, triple in less than 25. The combined effect of demographics and migratory flows (the competent French abandon ship, third world populations flow in, it's pure social Darwinism. The situation is Herzegovinian and Chiraq King of the Frenchies is riding the wave with 82% of the vote!

The entire article is well worth reading, everyone.

Counterpunch accusing Dershowitz of dishonest writing is like Al Capone admonishing Chicago police for gangsterism.

OT British Snooker Ace O'Sullivan Embraces Islam
The 2001 World Snooker Champion has embraced Islam. Interestingly,

Despite his precocious talent, the 27-year-old has battled drink and drug addiction as well as depression

Often seems the way that those who convert or are "born-again" have had problems such as these. What was it Marx said about religion?

A reporter puts the lives of kids at risk, presumably to give the liberators of Iraq a bad name.

http://www.abc.net.a... a reporter ordered kids to stand on an Iraqi missile launcher. She was doing a story on unexploded ordinance.

#105 Andjam

Very disturbing.

# 104 - NO FREAKING WAY! I used to have a crush on Ronnie O'Sullivan. (I go for weird-looking blokes, before anyone says anything, my latest is Justin Hawkins and I won't hear a word said against him!)

Bloody Prince Naseem. I knew there had to be a reason he behaved like such a wanker!

Oh my, Andjam, I just read that! She should not only be fired, but taken to court - surely there's some crime in doing what she did. And her husband is UNICEF's media officer? Sickening.

OT - Putting tin foil hat firmly on head...

Fellow lizardoid minions, something is happening.

Charles says

If entries seem to be a bit slow, it’s because I’ve been working on several projects.

Frank IMAO says

Sorry about the dearth of posting.

Rachel Lucas says

Really, I don't have anything to say. There's nothing keeping me from blogging except I have nothing to say lately that's not already being said

Our favourite bloggers are doing something secret, and I think I know what it is, but I'm not telling - unless my ZOG cheque bounces.

/conspriational delusion

#101 axiom

Take these comments from "a reader in San Antonio".

i have met all the LLL in the city and i can attest to the fact that this tool has not read the book.

Israel is the only occupier power in the history of man kind that did not assume responsibility about eh people they are occupying.

that is the caliber of the arguments that i run into around here. what a fool. can anyone come up with another occupier that did not take care of its new found population? anyone? i know its a real tough question. for some reason germany and japan come to mind. dunno why.

Sorry it's OT, but I had to share this link I found on Andrew Sullivan this morning.
http://shterzer.com/...

Still OTMore info on Ronnie O'Sullivan's Conversion to Islam, this time from the dreaded Grauniad. Seems like the conversion was enabled by"Prince" Naseem Hamad, the former world featherweight boxing champion.

Hamed's influence on O'Sullivan was first apparent at the 2002 Embassy World Championship when he adopted some of the boxer's habitual pre-fight bombast by making a wholly unjustified attack on Stephen Hendry's integrity before their semi-final. He also attacked Ian Doyle, his former manager. O'Sullivan later admitted: "I spent two hours with Nas at his gym and the boxing talk got in my head. What I said about Stephen and Ian wasn't me. It was like somebody else talking. The worst thing now is that Stephen won't talk to me."

What's all this? Bombast? Wholly unjustified attacks on others' integrity? Sounds like the boy'll be a natural. His time in mental institutions and use of Prozac should also prepare him well.

OT:

Gaza, Sept. 13. A funeral procession for slain Hamas leader Abdul Al-Jaffara seemed about to turn into an angry demonstration when it was suddenly attacked by Israeli planes firing rockets and dropping napalm. The area of the demonstration is still, several hours after the event, "a sea of flames," and there has been no estimate of fatalities, though estimates run as high as a thousand. This was the first attempt at a large public demonstration in Palestinian territories since the riots that followed the funeral of slain terrorist leader Yasser Arafat in 2001, which drew a similar Israeli response, with more than 2,000 reported dead. A spokesman for the Israeli government declared after that event that: "Demonstrations in support of terrorism are acts of war. That is clearly implicit in the phrase 'war on terror'." President Bush later said he was in "full agreement" with this policy.

(From John Derbyshire's "Alternative Universe" on NationalReviewOnline.com, a parody based on a what-if scenario if the US (and Israel) was REALLY serious about fighting terror...

I knew that name, Prince Naseem Hamad, was familiar. I didn't even know he was a Muslim. The extravagent entrances on a flying carpet, as well as taunting his opponents with a "drunken boxing" style of fighting were totally a violation of Islamic priniciples. Where's the fatwa?

Function.TinFoil Off

"Honour" killing reaches Britain.

The BBC had 'Muslim kills daughter' as a headline, but has now changed it to 'Man kills daughter'.

Man jailed for daughter's murder

I recommend:

One Palestine: Complete, by Tom Segev.

Hesiod

Are you done calling this blog Little Green Snotballs?

I am sure Hesiod is simply jealous that LGF gets more hits in 10 minutes then Counterspint Central (Hesiod's blog) gets in an entire day.

Even a broken clock is kinda right twice a day, though. "One Palestine, Complete" is a decent book, albeit a bit biased against Jews.

I don't know if anyone has ever read it, but there was a book that came out in 1968 or 67 entitled "The Case for Israel" by Frank Gervasi, the cover design was almost identical to the one by Dershowitz. Is this book intended to be a sort of follow-up to that book or is it a coincidence?

Holy Crap! LOL!!!!

I found it via Andrew Sullivan!

Made my day!

Tyson: Dershowitz doesn't acknowledge Frank Gervasi in the "Acknowledgements" section at the intro of the book.

Here's a the exact Acknowledgements.

I have been working on this book since 1967, when I first began to make the case for Israel on university campuses, in the media, and in my writings. Over the years I have had the assistance--often critical assistance--of to many colleagues to list and thank. Among those who deserve special mentio are Professor Irwin Cotler, now a member of the Canadian Parlaiment, with whom I have worked on so many causes and projects; Justice Aharon Barak and Yitzak Zamir, who have taught me so much; Professor George Fletcher, who educates me by arguing and challenging; Professor Amnon Rubinstein, with whose writings I nearly always agree; Israel Ringel, who gently corrects my misperceptions about Israel; and generations of students who educate me about current matters.

In writing this book, I have benefited greatly from the research assistance of Owen Alterman, Mara Zusman, Eric Citron, Holly Beth Billington, Natalie Hershlag, and Ayelet Weiss....[the rest is family and people that work for Dershowitz].

Maybe a nothing, but found this little gem imbedded in a story about Mo Dahlan bitchin' about the "intefadeh":

Also Monday, Yasser Arafat's aides said the Palestinian leader has a severe case of the flu, as a result of which he has unable to keep down food for three days and has sent for his personal physician, Dr. Ashraf al-Kurdi, who was en route from Amman, Jordan.

Link Here

Go virus go!

Oh, and Mo Dahlan said

The Palestinians were better off before they launched their uprising against Israel, the ousted Palestinian security chief said Monday, as thousands marched to mark the three-year anniversary of the revolt.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Mohammed Dahlan also said the Palestinians misread the dramatic changes brought by the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the United States, and that hurt their aspirations of statehood.

yada yada

One thing I failed to attend this weekend was a barbeque commemorating the anniversery of the launching of the second intifada. I did not inquire if the food was halal.

http://www.amazon.co...

# 87 tasty Beverage:

I loathe soccer, too. Love football, though. The real one, with a round ball and a foot!

Anyway, re: NK: Oppressive governments have always used sport to show their progressiveness. You may not know this but in 1966, the NK men's team made the World Cup finals, a first (and only) for that country. Rather than showing the games live, risking a riot in a rigidly oppressive socialist (read: communist) country, the games were shown on tape delay ONLY when NK won; needless to say, they didn't win it all as England won it's only Cup at Wembley. The team just disappeared from television, and the people of NK knew that their team had lost, though no announcement to that effect was ever made to the populace as a whole.

Again, anything to make their country look better to their own people and the rest of the world, which is an ultimate joke.

By the way, did you see the way the Saudi women's team played? Oh, right, the RoP and women's rights and all that. Mustn't get the male population of the world excited by too much female Saudi thigh, especially while it's still attached to a breathing human being.

I do feel that any country that does not participate in the Women's World Cup should be charged with Human Rights abuses since not allowing women to participate in sports is a prima facia case.

--------

Go AJAX!

http://www.amazon.co...

http://www.amazon.co...

http://www.amazon.co...

http://www.amazon.co...

#104 Paul of Arabia

That can happen, if someone who is already mentally unstable exacerbates their problem with untold amounts of champagne and 'naughty salt.' It'll be interesting to see if he turns up for tournemants with a daft-looking beard, and then gets down on his prayer mat during those long 35-frame World Championship matches.

RickZ, sorry to intervene like this, but the 1966 WC finals game was played between England and Germany (the former won, as you pointed out). NK made it to the quarter-finals, though, where they lost to Portugal.

... not that it's anywhere near the point, but still... :-)

# 129 Swede:

The Finals are the the 24 or 32 teams (depending on what year we're discussing) that make it past qualifying. The Final is the last game for the championship.

Mr Pol, you say.

Edward Said wrote a propaganda book against Joan Peters, yes. IMO he succeeded in proving her right.

whats the name of this book?

#132 ploome

Blaming the Victims: Spurious Scholarship and the Palestinian Question

"I am sure Hesiod is simply jealous that LGF gets more hits in 10 minutes then Counterspint Central (Hesiod's blog) gets in an entire day."

Does Chuck publish his hit stats? If not, how do you know?

In any event, since Istarted my blog at the end of last June, Ive had over 1.1 million visits to my site.

I'm not complaining.

Why do LLL's not capitalize or punctuate (or go way overboard and capitalize everything and use a million exclamation points) ... is grammar and spelling a tool of the man?
Do they think that looks cool?
Or are they just stupid and/or on crack?

P.S.

"One Palestine Complete" is not "a bit biased against Jews."

It's acurate. [And meticulously researched so all of his conclusions are backed up].

That's a problem for you. It doesn't absolve zionists from all responsibility for the problems in the region, or whitewash their excesses. Nor does it absolve or whitewash Arab excesses or responsibility.

Segev portrays the creation of Israel as a complex, and multifacted process that took place over several decades.

"Hesiod

Are you done calling this blog Little Green Snotballs?"

I never referred to this blog as "Little Green Snotballs."

I called it "Little Green Snotbubbles."

And, as soon as you folks figure out that one can be pro-Israel without also sucking Arik Sharon's member, I'll cease and desist.

A few jealous arseholes have made sure my books have a poor rating on Amazon. I am not surprised by this sort of organised campaign to trash a pro-Israel book. I bet none of them have read it either.

"I've long had an image of Alan Dershowitz as the legal avatar of the Wicked Queen in Snow White. I don't mean I imagine him in drag going around poisoning people. It's just that all those times I heard him sniping about William Kunstler back when Kunstler was taking those poor and generally unattractive defendants Dershowitz wouldn't be in the same courtroom with, I'd imagine Dershowitz standing in front of a mirror, neatening up the moustache he wore in those days, and saying, "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the best criminal rights lawyer of them all?"

The mirror says, "Bill Kunstler. You know that, Alan."

Dershowitz grinds his teeth, goes "Grrrrrrrr!" and then rushes off to meetings with Claus von Bulow or Mike Tyson or Michael Milken or another of his very wealthy clients."

...continues...

Hesiod

I am as Pro Israel as they come.

I am a former soldier of the IDF.

Do I agree with Arik Sharon's every move?

Hell m'fing no!!!

Do I think there are better ways of handling the conflict? Yes. Absolutely.

Do I know who the enemy is?

Yes and it is not Arik.

The complete and utter devestation of the Palestinians terrorist organizations is necessary and then Arik is gone.

As far as Arik's member... go home to your own blog.

#134, 136, 137 Hesiod

FOAD.

#116 Hesiod 9/29/2003 06:57AM PST

I recommend: One Palestine: Complete, by Tom Segev.

I have also read that book, and it's a good one. Though I've never understood why a Jew would try to be "even-handed" when nobody else is trying to be.

What's with you jews and your intellectual honesty?

Wow, an intelligent counterpunch reader. Now I've seen everything.

#140 AG in Houston

Do I agree with Arik Sharon's every move? Hell m'fing no!!!

I'm curious, what has Sharon done that you so vehemently disagree with?

Bad, BAD Alan! You naughty Zionist! That's fifteen minutes in the corner for YOU!

"The complete and utter devestation of the Palestinians terrorist organizations is necessary and then Arik is gone."

That sounds a lot like the British Gvt. policy toward the provisional IRA until several years ago. And they were at least as nasty as the Israelis.

Didn't work then either.

The book that supposedly debunks the Joan Peters's book was written by Norman Finkelstein. Perhaps Edward Said also wrote such a book, but usually the book referred to is Finkelstein's.

Basically, all Finkelstein and Cockburn have been able to come up with is that Dersh misspelled a couple foreign names, made an obvious typo about "hundred" thousand, and misattributed the term "turnspeak" to Orwell. The latter is a common mistake. None of this is even remotely earth shattering, much less plagiarism. Even Edward Said misspelled some names and made some typos in his work, especially in his last book, the one about Freud, in which he misspells Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi's name, one of his main sources. Cockburn and Finkelstein aren't bitching about that, though.

And regarding Dersh using a handful of the same sources as Peters: well, no fucking duh. Dersh isn't the first person to use sources that Peters also used, and he won't be the last. And Peters wasn't the first to use the sources either. Historical sources don't lose their validity just because someone you don't like has quoted them in a book you don't like, dumbasses. By Finkelstein's and Cockburn's asinine logic, anyone who uses the Mark Twain quote has now plagiarized Peters. This is the whole basis of their lame argument. Of course, this same logic by which they accuse Dersh of plagiarizing Peters would entail that Cockburn has now plagiarized Finkelstein. What intellectual fuck-ups.

There was a debate between Finkelstein and Dersh a few days ago, in which Finkelstein tries to sandbag Dersh, fails miserably, and wigs out and starts ranting about Dersh being a disgrace, etc. It's available through Finkelstein's website.

Edward Said misspelled some names and made some typos in his work, especially in his last book, the one about Freud, in which he misspells Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi's name

Let me guess, he spelled it Yusuf Hayim Al-Qudsi?

Frank IBC lmfao

Cockburn

Hey Beavis...maybe that dude should, like, use Vaseline next time....huhuhuh heheheh

The longer they make us talk about "plagiarism", the longer they can keep us from talking about the substance of the book.

I read Joan Peter's book, and I don't agree with every single one of her conclusions, as in any book I read. But as long as they can keep us talking about that, they keep us from talking about the substance of her book.

Counterpunch is obsessed with Jews.

For example, from the August 25th article by Kurt Nimmo

"On August 16, Steinberg commented on Eitan's alleged resurfacing in the United States. "Eitan is making these high-risk journeys, U.S. and Israeli sources report, because he is directing plans for a major terrorist attack on American soil -- a new 9/11 -- to be blamed on either Muslim or Latin American terrorists... sources -- both Israeli and American -- have warned that Eitan is putting the finishing touches on such an operation, which coincides with Vice President Dick Cheney's aggressive promotion of the idea that the United States is facing an imminent new 9/11 attack."

(Eitan is a former Mossad officer)

#22 Counterpunch Reader

A troll is someone who leaves a comment, fishing to stir things up.
What trolls say is usually well off the current conversation and usually demands a response.

Trolls do not read the topic or material of the thread. Nor to they read each reply in order.

THEY often disagree with the posters. The posters are not disagreeing with the troll, as the troll posted afterwards.

http://www.winternet...
http://www.winternet...

#145 - Hesiod

That sounds a lot like the British Gvt. policy toward the provisional IRA until several years ago. And they were at least as nasty as the Israelis.
Didn't work then either.

Err...HELLO!!! (Raps knuckles sharply and repeatedly on Hesiod's head)Do you think the Provos would have finally come to the table and signed the Peace agreement if the British government hadn't been kicking their butts so badly? Adams & McGuiness were desparate to sign before the SAS totally destroyed them. Sheesh, an ijeet is your man Hesiod, and no mistake!

One Palestine Complete is no less a political tome than any other "New Historian" telling of Israel's history. Its main thesis, that the British actually "favored" the Zionists over the Arabs, is laughably off, and has been successfully refuted by other Israeli historians since.

Segev's portrayal of Ben Gurion as an intransigent, combative leader, as opposed to the portayals of the Arab leaders as misguided, angry, "revolutionaries" is anything but "objective".

Interesting that a leftist history of Israel is considered "objective", while pro-zionist histories of Israel are considered "biased".

And last, Segev has changed his tune recently in how he sees the situation, and has moved a bit more to the right. This only reinforces the political motivations of his earlier findings and conclusions.

This truly IS an Organized Campaign. I saw it happen on DC area Radio Talk Shows from the mid eighties right thru the nineties. You began to hear the same Arabists with the same talking points presented in the same order. They were paid to call up our talk shows to trash anything Israel did and anything any Jew did and ya know what? What they did WORKED. There is gonna be a Palestinian State whether the American People want it or NOT.

I'm interested to know why Bezos allows this. Who IS Bezos and IF we can determine that there is an organized campaign to trash many Jews and their books that support Israel on his Co's Website ..then Bezos knows that there is this as well.

These arent real folks using their Free Speech rights. on Amazon...these are paid for or volunteers for Islam.

Whatever we can figure out..THEY (whoever they are ) can figure out as well...

#153   Paul of Arabia

The IRA were not defeated by the British (SAS included). The decision to move towards a primarily political campaign was made by Adams and others, probably beginning from the electoral successes of the hunger strike candidates onwards in the 80's.
It was clear enough to everyone involved that there was no military solution to the troubles, neither from a british army perspective, or from an IRA armed campaign perspective. The numbers of IRA activists killed by the SAS were actually rather few, and at the time of the ceasefire, they (the IRA) had a solid capacity (and arms stockpiles) to maintain terrorist actions well into the future. Their move towards constitutional politics solely was based on a belief by the Sinn Fein leadership that it was now the best route to serve their aims, and that the armed campaign had served it's purpose in focussing the British government on the issue of self determination in NI.

The latest review could very well have been posted by Finkelstein or Cockburn himself:

Dershowitz should be ashamed of his book. Any author that uses quotes from Joan Peters' From Time Immemorial over 20 times in the first two chapters is no author at all. Norman Finkelstein and Alexander Cockburn are absolutely correct in denouncing this forgery. I urge people to get the facts about this book before they read it.

Alexander Cockburn was released from the Village Voice after he was caught taking payoffs from a now defunct Arab think tank chaired by Edward Said.

He also publicly sparred with people at the Nation (I'm not even sure if he writes for them anymore), after his column was cut back and/or moved.

Also, a couple of years ago in the New York Press, during the confrontation at the Church of the Nativity, Cockburn published a photo of a Nazi-looking IDF soldier with a bayonet, standing over the manger with the baby Jesus inside.

And finally, I sparred with Cockburn when he started circulating the story of "Mossad being behind September 11th". The best he could do was refer me to articles on antiwar.com and Newsmax (which, at the time, had a "photograph" of Dick Cheney wearing a yarmulke - as proof that the Mossad and the Jews had "hijacked" congress).

Cockburn is a malcontent, an anti-Semite, and an idiot.
It must be frustrating to go up against one of the pre-eminent legal minds in the country, who was the youngest person in Harvard's history ever to become a professor...and a Jewish one, no less.