# Good basic book about founding of Israel **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 28, 2014, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254 "2014-07-28T16:36:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2014, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/21 "2014-07-29T03:25:15Z")
If you don’t mind historical fiction accounts that might be less dry to read than non-fiction, you might consider Leon Uris’s “Exodus” and “The Haj”, which are sort of fictional personal stories from both sides. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2014, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/22 "2014-07-29T04:32:14Z")
I’ve read both Exodus and The Haj, and, while I enjoyed them and admired them, they’re really pretty one-sided. Uris is a good writer; the books were good stuff. But they’re unabashedly pro-Israeli, and, although the biases are artful as opposed to overt, the biases do poison these books as true educational resources. (I say this as an unabashed pro-Israel partisan.) ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/23 "2014-07-31T00:23:48Z")
In a political science class I had c. 2005, give or take, required reading was “Politics of the Middle East”, pub. date somewhere from 2002-2005, can’t remember. It seemed pretty unbiased. Not overly short, nor long. Gave a good picture of all of the nations of the area, and their politics. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/24 "2014-07-31T01:50:26Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > holocaust/genocide deniers ? Chomsky? How you figure? Never heard that one before. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/25 "2014-07-31T02:40:27Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > ? Chomsky? How you figure? > > Never heard that one before. He claimed the Cambodian Holocaust was a hoax to discredit the Khmer Rouge, whom he likened to the French resistance during WWII. ---
**Author:** ![Jay4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f1d935/32.png) [@Jay4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay4)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/26 "2014-07-31T02:54:25Z")
didnt know the Fedora wearing losers on reddit had knowledge about the bible.wernt they busy thinking they are enlightened by their intelligence or whatever crap atheists believe in maybe they are among the same crowd who gets there news from an idiot on a comedy show instead of a real news channel ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/27 "2014-07-31T03:00:39Z")
> [@Jay4](#): > > didnt know the Fedora wearing losers on reddit had knowledge about the bible.wernt they busy thinking they are enlightened by their intelligence or whatever crap atheists believe in > > maybe they are among the same crowd who gets there news from an idiot on a comedy show instead of a real news channel Huh? ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/28 "2014-07-31T03:02:23Z")
> [@Jay4](#): > > didnt know the Fedora wearing losers on reddit had knowledge about the bible.wernt they busy thinking they are enlightened by their intelligence or whatever crap atheists believe in > > maybe they are among the same crowd who gets there news from an idiot on a comedy show instead of a real news channel Wow, how insulting. ---
**Author:** ![rsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/839c29/32.png) [@rsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsa)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/29 "2014-07-31T03:22:26Z")
> [@Jay4](#): > > didnt know the Fedora wearing losers on reddit had knowledge about the bible.wernt they busy thinking they are enlightened by their intelligence or whatever crap atheists believe in > > maybe they are among the same crowd who gets there news from an idiot on a comedy show instead of a real news channel I guess you missed this: [Stephen Colbert’s Civics Lesson: Or, how a TV humorist taught America about campaign finance](http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/stephen-colberts-civics-lesson-or-how-a-tv-humorist-taught-america-about-campaign-finance/) > [@](#): > > “It’s the first study actually showing that Colbert is doing a better job than other news sources at teaching people about campaign financing,” said Bruce W. Hardy, Ph.D., lead author of the study and a senior researcher at the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania. “Consistently, we found that Colbert did better than every other news source we included in our model.” Seems like late night comedy shows are pretty good in the news department. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/30 "2014-07-31T03:34:20Z")
For novels using the history as background, you might try Leon Uris’s _Exodus_ and _The Haj_. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/31 "2014-07-31T03:47:47Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > He claimed the Cambodian Holocaust was a hoax to discredit the Khmer Rouge, whom he likened to the French resistance during WWII. Got a cite for that? I have now read some discussions of the Chomsky-and-Cambodia issue, and it seems to boil down to what people have read into [this 1977 review by Chomsky and Edward S. Herman of some books about Cambodia](http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm), written while outside observers still had little access to hard data about what was going on in the country. As [this 2012 analysis notes](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-wu/press-coverage-of-the-cam_b_1469187.html), > [@](#): > > Reporting on Cambodia’s genocide was incredibly difficult. Because the Khmer Rouge closed the country, it was almost impossible for foreign correspondents to report directly. Instead, they depended mostly on refugee testimonies. Thousands of civilians managed to escape to refugee camps in Thailand. These refugees became a primary source of information. > > However, journalists were criticized for using only refugee testimonies because their accounts were usually unverifiable. Journalists had no way of knowing if their stories were true, but there was no one else to confirm with. As a result, American media consumers were very skeptical of the already sparse information they received. Such skepticism seems to be the mainspring of Chomsky and Herman’s 1977 book review, but I can’t see anything in the review that amounts to “denial” of verified facts. Nor do I see, although I may have missed something, any evidence that Chomsky has since denied any verified facts about the Cambodian genocide that became known after 1977. About the review itself: > [@Chomsky and Herman](#): > > It was inevitable with the failure of the American effort to subdue South Vietnam and to crush the mass movements elsewhere in Indochina, that there would be a campaign to reconstruct the history of these years so as to place the role of the United States in a more favorable light. […] Well suited for these aims are tales of Communist atrocities […] > > It is in this context that we must view the recent spate of newspaper reports, editorials and books on Cambodia […] > > Ponchaud’s book is serious and worth reading, as distinct from much of the commentary it has elicited. He gives a grisly account of of what refugees have reported to him about the barbarity of their treatment at the hands of the Khmer Rouge. […] > > As noted, Ponchaud relies overwhelmingly on refugee reports. Thus his account is at best second-hand with many of the refugees reporting what they claim to have heard from others. Lacouture’s review gives at best a third-hand account. Commentary on Lacouture’s review in the press, which has been extensive, gives a fourth-hand account. That is what is available to readers of the American press. […] > > In his corrections, Lacouture raises the questions whether precision on these matters is very important. “Faced with an enterprise as monstrous as the new Cambodian Government, should we see the main problem as one of deciding exactly which person uttered an inhuman phrase, and whether the regime has murdered thousands of hundreds or thousands of wretched people?” […] > > If, indeed, postwar Cambodia is, as he believes, similar to Nazi Germany, then his comment is perhaps just, though we may add that he has produced no evidence to support this judgement. But if postwar Cambodia is more similar to France after liberation, where many thousands of people were massacred within a few months under far less rigorous conditions than those left by the American war, then perhaps a rather different judgement is in order. If that last sentence is what you’re calling “likening the Khmer Rouge to the French resistance during WWII”, by the way, that sounds to me like a ludicrous distortion. The parallel that’s being drawn is simply between conditions of postwar instability, not between the missions or the morality of the French Resistance and the Khmer Rouge in themselves. To sum up, the points Chomsky and Herman seem to have been making about Cambodia in 1977 were these: 1. American atrocities in Cambodia were terrible and the western press really doesn’t want to talk about it. 2. Western media would prefer to blame Cambodian suffering entirely on Communist atrocities and reigns of terror. 3. This is why recent books alleging horrible oppression and slaughter on the part of the Communist Khmer Rouge have been so warmly received in the western press. 4. But the actual evidence on which those allegations are based at present is unreliable. Better evidence and more careful analysis are needed. It’s clear from the review that Chomsky and Herman were extremely critical of US anticommunist militancy and propaganda, and consequently they were wary of jumping to any conclusions about alleged evils perpetrated by Communist regimes. But that is a pretty far cry from actually “denying” a factually verified genocide or claiming that it was a “hoax”. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/32 "2014-07-31T05:00:19Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > For novels using the history as background, you might try Leon Uris’s _Exodus_ and _The Haj_. Mentioned – and rebutted, to a certain degree – above, posts 21 and 22. They are very good books…but they’re uncomfortably biased. (I share that bias, but, in an effort at objectivity, I think it should be warned against.) ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/33 "2014-07-31T05:51:19Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Got a cite for that? I have now read some discussions of the Chomsky-and-Cambodia issue, and it seems to boil down to what people have read into [this 1977 review by Chomsky and Edward S. Herman of some books about Cambodia](http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm), written while outside observers still had little access to hard data about what was going on in the country. As [this 2012 analysis notes](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-wu/press-coverage-of-the-cam_b_1469187.html), > Such skepticism seems to be the mainspring of Chomsky and Herman’s 1977 book review, but I can’t see anything in the review that amounts to “denial” of verified facts. Nor do I see, although I may have missed something, any evidence that Chomsky has since denied any verified facts about the Cambodian genocide that became known after 1977. > > About the review itself: > > If that last sentence is what you’re calling “likening the Khmer Rouge to the French resistance during WWII”, by the way, that sounds to me like a ludicrous distortion. The parallel that’s being drawn is simply between conditions of postwar instability, not between the missions or the morality of the French Resistance and the Khmer Rouge in themselves. > > To sum up, the points Chomsky and Herman seem to have been making about Cambodia in 1977 were these: > > 1. American atrocities in Cambodia were terrible and the western press really doesn’t want to talk about it. > > 2. Western media would prefer to blame Cambodian suffering entirely on Communist atrocities and reigns of terror. > > 3. This is why recent books alleging horrible oppression and slaughter on the part of the Communist Khmer Rouge have been so warmly received in the western press. > > 4. But the actual evidence on which those allegations are based at present is unreliable. Better evidence and more careful analysis are needed. > > It’s clear from the review that Chomsky and Herman were extremely critical of US anticommunist militancy and propaganda, and consequently they were wary of jumping to any conclusions about alleged evils perpetrated by Communist regimes. But that is a pretty far cry from actually “denying” a factually verified genocide or claiming that it was a “hoax”. Sigh, I don’t really want to start this fight all over again and it’s not germane to the thread, but he attacked reporters like Sydney Schanberg, gullibly accepted reports by the Khmer Rouge as fact and insisted that the Cambodian refugees were liars, implied strongly that the Khmer Rouge should be likened to the French resistance and strongly suggested that the total number of people killed by the Khmer Rouge was a few thousand. His actions were almost identical to most people who deny the Shoah, such as David Irving or Mahmoud Abbas. Now, if your position is that we should not call David Irving a Holocaust Denier because he claims he isn’t, just insists the numbers were heavily exaggerated and that the survivors are liars and it was a story pushed to cover up allied war crimes I guess you have a point. Personally I doubt you’ll take that argument. However, the article you’re referring to mirrors the writings of Irving and other deniers. So yes, Chomsky was a genocide denier and all but his groupies denounced The Nation for running that idiotic piece of claptrap. Chomsky is not a reliable source. He’s a polemicist who cares little for the truth and has been repeatedly caught in lies. If you want to continue this argument I recommend opening up another thread or reopening an old thread on the subject since this has come up before. Here’s one you can reopen. Warning it didn’t go well for the OP and most people agreed that yes Chomsky clearly was guilty of genocide denial. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=667328&highlight=Chomsky](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=667328&highlight=Chomsky) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/34 "2014-07-31T06:40:51Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Sigh, I don’t really want to start this fight all over again and it’s not germane to the thread, but he attacked reporters like Sydney Schanberg, gullibly accepted reports by the Khmer Rouge as fact and insisted that the Cambodian refugees were liars, implied strongly that the Khmer Rouge should be likened to the French resistance and strongly suggested that the total number of people killed by the Khmer Rouge was a few thousand. Got a cite for any of that, specifically? There are remarks in the 1977 review (when, as I noted, the Khmer Rouge was in full career and verifiable data was thin on the ground) that refer to some of those topics but don’t come near to actually saying what you claim they say. Especially given your wildly exaggerated distortion about Chomsky’s “likening” the Khmer Rouge to the French Resistance, I would need some pretty solid cites in order to believe that Chomsky actually says what you claim he says. > [@Ibn Warraq](#): > > Here’s one you can reopen. Warning it didn’t go well for the OP and most people agreed that yes Chomsky clearly was guilty of genocide denial. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=667328&highlight=Chomsky](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=667328&highlight=Chomsky) That 2012 thread doesn’t seem to have any more actual evidence in it than you’ve provided here. Just a bunch of links to articles criticizing Chomsky without carefully examining what he actually said. And your _argumentum ad populum_ about the participants’ opinions isn’t particularly convincing, either. The most cogent post in it was one by **Frylock** : > [@Frylock](#): > > Many people in this thread are failing to note the difference between: > > Criticizing the way things are reported, > > and on the other hand, > > Justifying the actions being reported. > > A lot of times Chomsky is doing the former, but being misread as doing the latter. Yes, this is a hijack, so if you and/or the mods think it shouldn’t be continued here, okay. But while I’ve never read [_The Fateful Triangle_](http://www.amazon.com/Fateful-Triangle-Palestinians-Updated-Classics/dp/0896086011?tag=viglink20265-20) and hold no brief for its appropriateness as the good basic book about the founding of Israel that the OP is after (or for Chomsky’s writings in general, for that matter), the obvious over-the-top vehemence of your antipathy to Chomsky is not making your criticisms of him look more trustworthy. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/35 "2014-07-31T06:54:06Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yes, this is a hijack, so if you and/or the mods think it shouldn’t be continued here, okay. I don’t so feel free to reopen the thread then if you want to argue over whether or not Chomsky’s review is an example of genocide denial equivalent to those who say “I’m not a Holocaust denier, I’m a Holocaust skeptic”. I wasn’t trying to start up a big food fight, just to note that Chomsky is a polemicist with a severe allergy for the truth who often lets his ideology get in the way of his facts. Before going in to defend him, I’d recommend keeping in mind that he had to have editions of his book \*American Power and the New Mandarins \*pulled and re edited because he was caught by Arthur Schlessinger Jr. manufacturing quotes and falsely attributing them to Harry Truman. For anyone who wants to read the article that provoked a torrent of letters to the editor of the Nation denouncing them for engaging in genocide denial, here it is. If anyone wants to argue in Chomsky’s defense I’d recommend opening the linked thread rather than continuing this hijack. [http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm](http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/36 "2014-07-31T07:19:46Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > For anyone who wants to read the article […] here it is. […] > > [http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm](http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm) Pssst… that is the very same review by Chomsky and Herman that I linked to four posts ago and have been talking about ever since. :dubious: The fact that you don’t even notice which cites I posted does not reassure me about the cogency with which you’re reading or understanding my posts. > [@Ibn Warraq](#): > > Before going in to defend him, I’d recommend keeping in mind that he had to have editions of his book American Power and the New Mandarins pulled and re edited because he was caught by Arthur Schlessinger Jr. manufacturing quotes and falsely attributing them to Harry Truman. This is another of those instances where what you claim is wildly different from what the actual text says. As [this review notes concerning the book in question](http://www.amazon.co.uk/American-Power-New-Mandarins-Historical/dp/156584775X), > [@](#): > > Also of some interest is a paraphrase of a quote from Harry Truman by James Warburg that Chomsky quotes. In the first edition Chomsky attributed the quote exclusively to Truman; it was corrected and attributed to Warburg, very similar to Truman’s original quote, in the second edition of the book published shortly after. So what you call “manufacturing quotes and falsely attributing them to Harry Truman” was actually “mislabeling a _close paraphrase_ of a quote from Harry Truman as a _direct verbatim_ quote from Harry Truman”. Now admittedly, even such a minor editorial error as that is still an error and should not have been made. But for you to describe it as “manufacturing quotes and falsely attributing them” seems **way** more distorting and misleading than what Chomsky did. You seem to be just pulling inaccurate anti-Chomsky talking points off someplace like Conservapedia rather than thoughtfully analyzing anything Chomsky actually said. As you note, though, I don’t think much enlightenment is to be gained from continuing the discussion here. Feel free to take this thread’s last word on the subject if you want it. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/37 "2014-07-31T07:19:48Z")
Anyway, back to the OP. I’d recommend Walter Laqueur’s _The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict._ [http://www.amazon.com/The-Israel-Arab-Reader-Documentary-Conflict/dp/0143113798/ref=pd\_cp\_b\_2](http://www.amazon.com/The-Israel-Arab-Reader-Documentary-Conflict/dp/0143113798/ref=pd_cp_b_2) I’d also recommend Simha Flappan’s _The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities_, though Terr would probably disagree. [http://www.amazon.com/Birth-Israel-Myths-Realities/dp/039455888X/ref=sr\_1\_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1406791102&sr=1-1&keywords=Simha+Flapan](http://www.amazon.com/Birth-Israel-Myths-Realities/dp/039455888X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1406791102&sr=1-1&keywords=Simha+Flapan) ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/38 "2014-07-31T07:42:53Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Pssst… that is the very same review by Chomsky and Herman that I linked to four posts ago and have been talking about ever since. :dubious: The fact that you don’t even notice which cites I posted does not reassure me about the cogency with which you’re reading or understanding my posts. Er… yes. I noticed. I was linking to the article to let people read it if they themselves wanted to. > [@](#): > > This is another of those instances where what you claim is wildly different from what the actual text says. As this review notes concerning the book in question, You mean “Chris” on [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com). I ask because unless I’m wrong that’s just a reader review on Amazon. If I’m wrong and “Chris” is a noted and reliable journalist or academic that’s a different story. > [@](#): > > You seem to be just pulling inaccurate anti-Chomsky talking points off someplace like Conservapedia rather than thoughtfully analyzing anything Chomsky actually said. Ok, this is bullshit. Actually, as I’d said, Chomsky was caught in the “error” by Arthur Schlessinger jr., one of America’s most respected historians by in 1969. Also, I had to laugh at the reference to “Conservapedia” since my source was Arthur Schlessinger Jr., who’s one of America’s most noted liberal historians. Chomsky would later try to claim that he’d merely “mislabeled” a paraphrase as an actual quote, but few people found his explanation terribly compelling. It’s worth noting that the book would never have been pulled had Schlessinger not caught Chomsky in the act. Here is Schlessinger’s letter to the editor of Commentary exposing Chomsky. [http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/trumans-speech-noam-chomsky/](http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/trumans-speech-noam-chomsky/) And yes, attempting to pass off a badly done paraphrase as a quote is considered to “manufacturing quotes.” As Schlessinger says of Chomsky. > [@](#): > > Dr. Chomsky, I fear, has succumbed to this malady of moralism. “It is the responsibility of intellectuals,” he wrote in his most celebrated essay, “to speak the truth and to expose lies.” Having said this, he seems to feel licensed to forget or distort the truth whenever it suits his polemical convenience.\*\* He begins as a preacher to the world and ends as an intellectual crook\*\* So yeah, it’s not “Conservapedia” that called Chomsky “an intellectual crook” it was Arthur Schlessinger Jr. I’m also not sure why you’d think only right-wingers don’t like Chomsky since the people who’ve usually done the best and most savage critiques of him, such as Schlessinger and Eric Altermann are anything but. ---
**Author:** ![Uniqueorn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/uniqueorn/32/2807_2.png) [@Uniqueorn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uniqueorn)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/39 "2014-07-31T09:21:36Z")
> [@seal\_cleaner](#): > > I need one! I have some thoughts about the whole mideast morass, but I only know enough to post on reddit. Is there a good bare bones factual account of this? Need not have pics. :rolleyes: I know you said “Need not have pics”, but I found this graphic novel about Israel really interesting: [“How to understand Israel in 60 days or less”](http://comicsalliance.com/sarah-glidden-how-to-understand-israel-in-60-days-or-less-interview/) ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2014, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254/40 "2014-07-31T14:39:08Z")
> [@Jay4](#): > > didnt know the Fedora wearing losers on reddit had knowledge about the bible.wernt they busy thinking they are enlightened by their intelligence or whatever crap atheists believe in > > maybe they are among the same crowd who gets there news from an idiot on a comedy show instead of a real news channel You’re in Cafe Society, not the Pit. Keep it civil and on-topic. Thanks, \*\*twickster \*\*, Cafe Society moderator [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-basic-book-about-founding-of-israel/694254.md?page=1)