The Case for Israel

Rating:
Summary: Excellent book erases a double standard
Review: Alan Dershowitz does a superb job of showing how the media has a double standard when it comes to Israel.

The UN obsesses on creating resolutions against Israel; all the while ignoring countries such as China, Zimbabwe, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, et al; it shows that there is a double standard.

Anyone interested in getting an honest assessment of what is going on in the Middle East; as opposed to a biased and prejudiced view should read The Case for Israel.

Rating:
Summary: Finally, a book by Dershowitz I can stand
Review: To say that I have not been a fan of Alan Dershowitz would be an understatement. Time and again, his views have differed from mine, and he has expressed those views in the most strident, and sometimes offensive, terms possible. But several reviewers mentioned this book as a useful complement to Yaacov Lozowick's _Right to Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel's Wars_, a book I thought was excellent, so I decided to give _The Case for Israel_ a try.

Well, I'm not sure that I learned a lot from Dershowitz that I didn't learn from Lozowick, but this book is an easy read, fairly well-organized, and, for the most part, competently done. At times I wished Dershowitz would have addressed an issue more deeply rather than (what seemed like) giving it a surface treatment. And there was some annoying repetition within _The Case for Israel_. I don't know if this is a style Dershowitz has developed for arguing to juries, who can't be counted on to be paying close attention the first time a point is made, or maybe it's a consequence of the book having its genesis in notes Dershowitz has been assembling over the course of 40 years, but I find it aggravating for an author to present a quote for the second or third time as if he's presenting it for the first.

The reaction to this book by Dershowitz's prominent critics has been interesting. The focus of their counterattack seems to be to impugn Dershowitz's integrity by charging him with plagiarism, in particular with improperly citing primary sources rather than citing the secondary sources they say he relied upon. That may (or may not) say something about Dershowitz's character or the care with which he assembled this book, but it's not clear what it says about Dershowitz's argument. Some of his critics go on to assert that the secondary source he relied upon has allegedly been discredited, but when challenged to give examples of inaccuracies that Dershowitz's book inherited from that secondary source, few or none seem to be forthcoming. When Dershowitz offered to give Norman Finkelstein $10,000 if he would point out an inaccuracy in the book, the best Finkelstein came up with is that a couple of figures are too low by a factor of 100, but these are figures that would strengthen Dershowitz's case if they were higher! This example may benefit Finkelstein financially (if Dershowitz pays up), but it's hard to see it as more than a Pyrrhic victory when it comes to substance. It reminds me of the gang-at-Cheers' response when they learned that Gary (of Gary's Oldtown Tavern) had tricked them into "pants"ing their hero, Wade Boggs: "Look at the bright side. We've got Wade Boggs' pants! We're number one! We're number one! . . ." For those of you who remember it, I think the comment that the barfly Al made about this "victory" celebration applies in this situation as well.

Rating:
Summary: Balanced
Review: Regardless of what some say, this book is extremely balanced. I am a moderate supporter of Israel, and I must say that I was taken back by some of the accusations Dershowitz makes about Israel. I came away understanding arguments for and against Iraeli policy.

Rating:
Summary: Um, Hello?
Review: The people who are writing positive reviews of this book can't possibly believe what they are saying -- it seems irrefutable that Dershowitz deliberately plagarized from Joan Peter's "From a Time Immortal" (See Dershowitz's correpondence with Nation correspondent Alexander Cockburn and Professor Norman Finkelstein here: http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/id143.htm You will see a detailed, systematic argument that I feel is quite compelling to indict Mr. Dershowitz on this scholarly joke). Peter's book, of course, has already widely been proven to be a hoax.

The Jewish people certainly have the right to security, however, this right extends to other peoples as well -- the Israeli government does not a possess a monopoly on security rights. Can this holy land not be shared in a single, secular state? What happened to Arab/Jewish Bi-Nationalism? Or are the few extremists too intristically inclined towards bigotry to allow such a brotherhood to occur?

Rating:
Summary: i don't think hatred can be fought with reason
Review: a very well-written and well-articulated book. i highly and definitely recommend it.

i still don't understand how the author comes to the conclusion that the two-state solution will solve the problem. terrorist attacks in what will remain of israel will only intensify. meanwhile the new palestinian state will arm itself to the teeth and prepare for another 1948 war. this has already been demonstrated by the oslo accords.

it's interesting to note that the only two persons i have heard of who were daring enough to state the most logical and humane solution (that of population transfer) were assassinated (kahana and ze'evi).

sincerely, a realist

Rating:
Summary: Pat Buchanan and Noam Chomsky: on the same page
Review: The aim of this book is not to come to grips with the terrible complexities of the Middle East conflict. Judged by that standard, it would be a disappointment.

The book's aim is, rather, to confront the rising tide of unprincipled and often madcap criticism of Israel from Islamic fundamentalists, Arab states, and leftist ideologues--all of whom can fairly be accused of instrumentalizing the Palestinian cause for one reason or another. Among the most self-righteous critics, it is de rigueur to take a free hand with the facts in the name of countering Israeli "spin."

By exposing many of the distortions fostered by unprincipled critics, Dershowitz performs the valuable service of clearing the air for serious discussion, and criticism, of many of Israel's policies--and of the occupation itself.

Once Dershowitz's case is made, his readers can stand back and point out many of the complexities he has suppressed. For example, while he is right to slam the turnspeak according to which Arafat and the Palestinians bear no blame for the collapse of Oslo (that violence can work alongside peace negotiations sounds like a bad idea, doesn't it?), it needs to be pointed out that Barak stoked legitimate Palestinian anxieties by redoubling settlement activity. That said, however, it is clear that the Palestinian leadership failed to curb its incitement and hate speech against Jews and Israel, even when Oslo seemed most promising. If the Palestinians will settle for nothing less than implementing the right of return as a condition of peace, that is their prerogative; but then they should not demand national recognition under the banner of a two-state solution.

Another complexity concerns the earlier history of the conflict. While Dershowitz is right to point out the contrast between Zionism and standard colonialist movements, he has not convincingly disposed of the charge that, from the standpoint of the indigenous Arab population, Zionism must have seemed very similar to the standard colonial model in important respects.

A point of detail: Dershowitiz claims that the Palestinians' use of terror (coupled with the international communities response) has leap-frogged their case for independence ahead of many nations with stronger claims, such as the Tibetans, the Kurds, and the Basques. Dershowitz is right to point to terror as a principal factor, but he has neglected the extent to which the United Nations are united, chiefly, by oil. Oil surely looms large in explaining why the misery of Palestinians under Egyptian and Jordanian occupation never attracted much international criticism: it was not in the interests of the Arab governments then (or, rather, it was not in their interests in the same way).

Finally, it is nice to see the likes of Pat Buchanan and Noam Chomsky pilloried together in the same chapter--and indeed on the same page--for their pernicious and utterly bizarre stances towards the Holocaust.

Rating:
Summary: Babylonian captivities of the mind
Review: After reading reviewing _Wrestling with Zion_ and _The Politics of Antisemitism_ I did a dialectical zigzag in this direction to see what's what. I have no further stake in the question of Israel and look on in sadness at the whole issue. I found Mr. Dershowitz'book interesting, provocative, useful, but inadequate. The case for Israel started with Herzl, and if the case isn't closed, one might ask what the problem is. The author's case looks good at all points for a non-specialist, but, as so often here, one is condemned to another six months fact checking in some other set of books. The material on Camp David is not convincing, and, while Arafat is open to criticism, the argument vilifying him all over again isn't concordant with all the facts. Nonetheless, I find this layout of point issues useful and was more than happy to take this as a challenge to research.
I think however those defending Israel are descending into a lack of realism. What is the core problem haunting this hundred year fiasco that has left Jewish culture politically corrupt, eroded the integrity of the American government with the plausibly deniable really existing Jewish lobby, and produced untold suffering on another people? Without denying Israel's right to exist, a legal issue, one must point to Dershowitz' impassioned statement at the start about the absolute right to the Jewish homeland, etc...Speaking not legally (and the question legally is one I grant)but in terms of historical insight, what right is this? What of the right of the Cherokee Indians to their historic homeland?
The philosopher Spinoza, one of the great Jewish (Marrano) thinkers, exposed the game four centuries ago, and said 'enough', to Jews and Christians both. In an age of Biblical Criticism, and a debriefing of the Old Testament, an ancient and dangerous myth has been exposed, yet now is resurgent, and armed with nuclear weapons. We can see that the whole mess is setting itself up to challenge the momentum of history, and thus slowly but surely the great Zionist beginning passes into the confusion we now see. It is to be hoped the complete fantasy of the Old Testament can be exposed and scrapped so something can be rescued from disaster. Herzl said as much.Perhaps its hopeless.
Dershowitz' case looks good on the surface, but it is not enough. And in any case we suspect these arguments simply buy time and front for some other intent behind the scenes. Sorry, I can respect the author, but not trust him. In any case, the book was useful and interesting.

Rating:
Summary: Why This Book is a Waste of Time
Review: Let me ask the question: why was this book written? Israel does not need a "case". It has survived for 55 years on its own with the occasional help from different governments. It knows where it is going. It is a democracy.

This book preaches to the converts - those people who support Israel. We do not need this book, and I cannot see why it sells. The problem is not a lack of justification or "case", it is a lack of any arab interest in any solution other than kicking the jews out. That is the heart of the problem. Sharon and the duly elected government in Israel will have to finish the fence and impose a solution to end the destruction. Instead of giving Dershowitz $20. send your money to the LIBI fund direct to help support the guys on the front lines in the IDF, or a similar fund.

My humble opinion.

Jack in Toronto

Rating:
Summary: A book that everyone should read
Review: This is a very good book about the current crisis in the Middle East, and everyone who is interested in knowing what is realy hapening there should read it. It is very well written, and uncovers the plot to destroy the only democratic state in the Middle East - Israel. It also shows that the enemies of Israel (and of every free loving nation) have indeed great weapons of mass destruction: lies and propaganda.

Rating:
Summary: A Must For Anyone Interested In Israel
Review: Thank goodness Mr. Dershowitz wrote this book. It answers so many accusations made about Israel that are unfounded. It is easy to understand and to find information. I've been responding to many of the accusations he comments on, and wish I had had his book for reference material several years ago. It's been said by Norman Finklestein that he lifted many of Joan Peter's material from her book "From Time Immemorial." I half-way expected to be rereading her book, but that was not the case at all. He has a lot of reference material. I thought I was a student of Israel, but he brings out many events and situations that were new to me. The book is fantastic. We've long needed such information.
Nadene Goldfoot
Ontario, Oregon USA