What extraordinary Trio! Despite some of their disagreement among one another, all of them are clearly united in their sense of humanity and courage. Unfortunately I`m writing these lines 11 years after this talk while tragic events are unfolding in Gaza. It would not have to that if the words of these three incredible speakers have been heeded.
....the ancient Greek Historian Herodutus, referred to the Palestinian people at least in the 5th century BC. Other ancient Greek philosophers also mention the Palestinian people
I think the dude who stood up during the Q&A section and started ranting about Sand's views without a real question was also at the Frontline lecture that he did when he wrote the next book on the invention of the land of Israel. In that one he kept shouting from the audience and when Sand declared that there were changes that he wanted to see in his country the guy shouted that he should just leave, which I thought was weird because that's not how societies progress - in fact that is one of the many things that leads to stagnation (so called "brain drain"). It's also strange that this man who presumably is a citizen of the UK feels that he has the right to tell someone who spent most of his life in Israel that he somehow has no right to criticize or advocate changes in his home country. Sand moved to Israel upon it's creation when he was 2 years of age, and his time before that was in a displaced persons camp in Europe, so in a very real sense Israel is the only place he could call home, and he has more of a right and vested interested in his advocation of change than this British guy.
"It's also strange that this man who presumably is a citizen of the UK feels that he has the right to tell someone who spent most of his life in Israel that he somehow has no right to criticize or advocate changes in his home country." Yep.
This is AMAZING! At the end we are all humans and the problem at the root is the identification with what we think we are in this Matrix. Separation is the illusion and we must wake up!
... and then the people who don't want to support separation begin to identify themselves as distinct from people who want separation, and the cycle continues. Just like liberal people want to impose liberalism to everyone else. Or democratic regimes demanding democracy on non-democratic regimes. Ironic and Paradoxical. ?
The guy who said Sand's book hadn't been peer reviewed is ridiculous - he stated that the factual aspects of his book were well known and even his critics acknowledged this- the only thing that he brings to the table is his analysis of those facts, which have been written about by his critics. History books come with footnotes, and it's very easy to obtain the data cited. The Yeshiva University findings of a common genetic link among Jewish people, however, is not subject to peer review, and other scientists like Eran Elhaik of Johns Hopkins were denied access to Yeshiva's data because he proposed an alternate theory of Jewish origins. It's very strange for scientist not to share his data with other scientists, especially since the data would only bolster the genetic link hypothesis if it can stand up to scrutiny.
The term Peleset (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in numerous Egyptian documents referring to a neighboring people or land starting from c.1150 BCE
Apart from its agreement with France over the partition of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman empire, Britain had made promises during the war to other parties concerning the same area. In central Arabia, there was a standing British alliance with Abdul-Aziz Ibn Saud, the Wahhabi Emir of Riyad who was subsequently to become the founder of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism was a movement of militant Islamic religious revival which had appeared in central Arabia in the middle decades of the eighteenth century, and the house of Saud had been politically associated with it since that time. In conflict with this British-Saudi alliance was the wartime alliance reached between Britain and Sharif Husayn, the Emir of Mecca, who enjoyed a special Arab and Islamic prestige as a recognized descendant of the Prophet, and whose family were called the Hashemites. In return for leading an Arab revolt against the Ottomans, the Sharif had been promised recognition as the head of an Arab kingdom the exact nature of which was left undefined. The Sharif, however, was led to understand that it would include all of Mesopotamia; all but a negotiable strip of coastal Syria; and the whole of peninsular Arabia, except for the parts which were already established as British protectorates. While the British relations with Ibn Saud were maintained by the British government of India, those with the Sharif were initiated and pursued by the British Arab Bureau in Cairo. Meanwhile, the British Foreign Office, in close touch with the World Zionist Organization, had by 1917 formally committed itself to viewing with favour the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The British wartime commitment to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish National Home in the Palestine west of the Jordan, which again received high priority, was formalized in 1920 and included as a special article in the statutes of the British mandate for Palestine, as registered in the League of Nations. For the Palestine east of the Jordan, or Transjordan, a special administrative arrangement was soon made. In 1916, when Sharif Husayn solemnly declared the start of the Arab Revolt against the Turks in Mecca, he also proclaimed himself king of the Arabs, and the British actually recognized him as king of the Hijaz, which was the furthest they felt they could go at the time. After the war, however, Ibn Saud, with his Wahhabi forces, began to attack the Hijaz, and completed its conquest by putting an end to Sharifian rule there in 1925.
This conversation is still very relevant 10 yrs later. The only update that one can make today is that the two state solution is no longer viable, Israel killed it. So what should be done now?
The work of these scholars should be essential readings in all academic programs at liberal faculties. Fortunately, more and more people are aware of the facts exposed here.
This is true, but the synthesis of Nationalism into Arab-Israeli politics has not been done by anyone except him, let alone at such a stunning quality. Also, this man's bravery is to be admired in my opinion.
I disagree with Avi Shlaim about Israel's legitimacy came through a UN resolution. At no time did the UN process any sovereignty or any other right over Palestine, ie. the UN processed no power to decide the partition of Palestine, or to assign any part of its territory to a religious minority of alien immigrants in order to create a state of their own against the wishes of the majority of the population......Neither individually or collectively could the member of the the UN alienate, reduce or impair the sovereignty of the people of Palestine, or dispose of their land, or destroy by partition the territorial integrity of their country. Israel's legitimacy can only come through the Palestinians, the sovereign owners, who, in 1988, recognized Israel right to exist on 78% of their land.
The "Palestinians" in 1948 was a reference to Jews & the others were referred to as Arabs until 1958 when the Arabs adopted the name as their own & the Jews became not Palestinian but "Israelis" in 1948. The native populations were miniscule and Arabs didn't own land titles much beyond 6% as Turks were the titled land holders. Most Arabs were their serfs. A big influx of Egyptian & Syrian landless peasants came in after WWI and they are the grandparents of today's Arab "Palestinians".
@@DEANMBLAKE I think you will find there were Arab Palestinian political parties in the early 1920s when Zionists were having a hard time convincing European Jewry - who were overwhelmingly opposed to Zionism -before the rise of nazism in 1932 Germany . Holocaust = Jewish Death , Zionist Life.
@@chugalongway01 1st Aliya was 1889. Western European Jews were not convinced but Eastern European Jews hadn't experienced any Emancipation. Russian Jewish charity bought 180,000 hectares in Golan & Barron Hirsch another 85,000 in Golan for settlements
@@DEANMBLAKE The Palestinian locals could have easily sent the Zionist settlers back to Poland if it wasn’t for British colonial sponsorship of the Zionist movement. When one talks about the Land Of Israel game you can’t ignore the Western powers that invented it and maintain it today.
@@chugalongway01 you misread history. The Brits say one thing & do another. Prior to and after the Balfour Declaration the Brits opposed Jewish Settlement. The Declaration was a forced anomoly. The Foreign Office didn't even know to whom it should be addressed & sent! By default someone suggested an important member of the Jewish community who was not involved at all!!! The document was dug up after Jews made their own moves to establish themselves. You are fishing for a rationale to justify the colonial narrative of Prof Sa'id. The Arabs bought British doubletalk & in the end there was no oil so they bailed out just like Regean bailed from Lebanon after the barracks bombing. Nothing in it for them but bad will after excluding Jews & deporting to Cyprus & the Holocaust became exposed. Israel exists today by it own strengths. Your assumption of Israeli weaknesses that need to be protected are just old antisemitic tropes about weak Jews.
I think it is not connected; cause to me shlomo sun looks khazar and the points he mentioned are gold. I think educators elevates the person. These 2 are academics and knowledge opened their eyes wide open .
Why "will be destroyed", "will be terminated", "has to be removed"? Strong words but why in the third person. May be you should try. There has been a number of "surgeons" before. Don't miss your chance.
There are no 1967 borders. There is only the 1949 Armistice Demarcation Line. 'The armistice agreements were clear (at Arab insistence) that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian-Israeli agreement stated "The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question." The Jordanian-Israeli agreement stated: "... no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims, and positions of either Party hereto in the peaceful settlement of the Palestine questions, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations" (Art. II.2), "The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto." (Art. VI.9)'
Since the time of that conference (2009), Israeli PM B. Netanyahu has confirmed what Professor Avi Shlaim stated about the responsibility of Netanyahu, the Likud and the settlements' land grabbing (watch by 20'57).
"Legal' and "lawful' are totally different with different definitions. Because something is "legal" does not necessarily mean it is "lawful" and mutatis mutandis.
No, you're wrong Legal in accordance with regulations: synonyms: lawful, licit, legitimate, complaint. So yeah, both mean "within the law" So you would be wrong. His entering the premises was legal; his entering the premises was lawful?
+Oners82 You can't reform reality. Go ahead.... try. Criminals try that all the time. You CAN *imagine* how you would LIKE the way things would be but .........it changes absolutely nothing. WHY are you refuting this? Probably life-long brainwashed and pretty stupid is the best guess.
@@Deluluissolulumadman there are other videos of Shlomo on YT and this knob head (Jonathan Hoffman) has the same aggressive attitude on all of them (yes he follows Shlomo around like a stalker) His point is to derail the conversation and shame the academics, not to provide any actual debate. In other words he's just a troll lol
@@Deluluissolulumadman no, since Harris actually advocated for profiling of Muslims when there is no way to "look Muslim" so it's just a racist call to profile people based on skin color. Hitches said no such thing.
the new atheists are very limited intellectually and basically imbeciles compared to other real intellectuals and new historians. I'm not talking about racism or islamophobia. I don't care about those things in the literal sense to be completely honest. I just don't think that thinkers that can't go beyond those parameters should be considered good thinkers. Sam Harris is starting to use false data and he's slowly going the Jordan Peterson route.
After reading the Introduction of his book, “A Brief Global History Of The Left” , I have come to conclusion that he, i. e., Shlomo Sand, wants to become popular/ more popular among non-Communist ‘Left’.
Terminology palestinains got created in 1964 by KGB from former USSR and Arafat from Egypt. in 1947 Jordan got created another arabs state on 70 % of Jewish land. After in 1946 Israel returned his original name, million Jews got robbed on thier properties, valubles, discriminated and forced out from arab countries. Israel is a tiny and ONLY Jewish state surrounded by 21 arab countries. After 1948 over million Jews got forced out from arab countries. There are over 2 milion arabs live in Israel as well as christians. Those Jews who returned to thier Jewish land they bought back thier land and rebuilt it into a beautiful state. Those who occupied or migrated to gaza, as well as those from Jewish land Judea and Samaria, should have rights to return to thier historical land in Egypt and reunite with thier extended families. Peace to all.
Absolute anti-history, biblical 'arguements', polemics, ideology and this wanna be wish for 'peace to all'. Freedom for all native people everywhere who suffered and are still suffering at the hands of their oppressors who always try to justify their heinous crimes with whatever tools they can find Also: Wow I've never heard of any country in the world having 26 other countries surrounding it 😮 haha
The hasbaresque grift is strong with this one. But honestly thx for making me laugh, I've never heard the KGB thing or the fact that there can be a country with 26 others surrounding it 😂
Adrean from the former Roman Empire Capturers renamed Jewish land into so called palestine in retaliation against Jews for resistance to occupation. Jesus was Jewish and born 2033 years ago in Jewish family, in Jewish city, on Jewish land occuped by former Roman Empire capturers. In 1948 Israel returned his original historical over 4000 year old name. If you never heard of someting, look at the map and study geography and history or at least go to the library. Facts and truth is important. Read Tora, Bible and Koran.
Oh how clever! The exact same comment as you posted on the Frontline video of Sand and his book about why he stopped being a Jew. So you're a liar and a bore.
Show the whole world where the Jews who presently occupy Palestine were clasped in iron chains, and transported on ships as slaves which sailed to diverse foreign lands, as the Bible teaches?
@@ghosttruth90 read your Roman & Spanish histories. There are 3 person accounts. Jewish children were kidnapped to farm sugar in the Azores by the Spanish. 130,000 Jews were the masons who built the Colluseum. Nero used 6,000 Jewish slaves to start a canal across the Corintheum ismus. Read a book!
@@ruthanneschnell9815 I'm serious. He's pulled a Bruno Bettelheim. Sands' PhD in history is in the field of theater arts. He's a disgruntled mediocre who got booted from an Israeli university. He's like Prof. Arthur Koestler of Yale did as a self-hating Jew.
There was no expulsion in 70 CE. If there was, what kind of Jewish population would be there to commit the Bar Kokhba revolt 60 years later? The evidence is clear, anyone who isn't completely brainwashed knows this.
The work of these scholars should be essential readings in all academic programs at liberal faculties. Fortunately, more and more people are aware of the facts exposed here.
I kind of agree on principle. Avi Shlaim has kept his dignity. Lovable and witty Shlomo Sand may be, but pictures of him hanging out with people like George Galloway, show a quality of naivete.
After reading the Introduction of his book, “A Brief Global History Of The Left” , I have come to conclusion that he, i. e., Shlomo Sand, wants to become popular/ more popular among non-Communist ‘Left’.
I see 2 humanists of the highest caliber and honest disposition. Being Jew and saying something against the grain shows they are very very courageous.
I am sicken to my stomach and will recommend this book to everyone I know!
This beautiful lady got my respect for calling the state not a child of a rape but the rapist itself.
Actually, it's both, to be precise. But yes, good, fitting imagery - and respect from me as well!
Thank you for this conversation, you have at restored my faith in humanity!
What extraordinary Trio! Despite some of their disagreement among one another, all of them are clearly united in their sense of humanity and courage.
Unfortunately I`m writing these lines 11 years after this talk while tragic events are unfolding in Gaza. It would not have to that if the words of these three incredible speakers have been heeded.
Your a good man avi thanks for all youve done and for your honesty god.
Bless you
Is very important to translate this conversation and the work for shlomo and Avi in Portuguese! Excelent!
a great speech vrom both men and a great moderator too.
Jonathan Hoffman has joined every event that Shlomo is involved. This guy has really has nothing better to do
A Great Debate Thanks and Peace & Love 2U All.
....the ancient Greek Historian Herodutus, referred to the Palestinian people at least in the 5th century BC.
Other ancient Greek philosophers also mention the Palestinian people
Such an insightful comment. Thank you for sharing!
I think the dude who stood up during the Q&A section and started ranting about Sand's views without a real question was also at the Frontline lecture that he did when he wrote the next book on the invention of the land of Israel.
In that one he kept shouting from the audience and when Sand declared that there were changes that he wanted to see in his country the guy shouted that he should just leave, which I thought was weird because that's not how societies progress - in fact that is one of the many things that leads to stagnation (so called "brain drain").
It's also strange that this man who presumably is a citizen of the UK feels that he has the right to tell someone who spent most of his life in Israel that he somehow has no right to criticize or advocate changes in his home country. Sand moved to Israel upon it's creation when he was 2 years of age, and his time before that was in a displaced persons camp in Europe, so in a very real sense Israel is the only place he could call home, and he has more of a right and vested interested in his advocation of change than this British guy.
"It's also strange that this man who presumably is a citizen of the UK feels that he has the right to tell someone who spent most of his life in Israel that he somehow has no right to criticize or advocate changes in his home country."
Yep.
Brilliant from Rose, right through!.
This is AMAZING!
At the end we are all humans and the problem at the root is the identification with what we think we are in this Matrix.
Separation is the illusion and we must wake up!
... and then the people who don't want to support separation begin to identify themselves as distinct from people who want separation, and the cycle continues. Just like liberal people want to impose liberalism to everyone else. Or democratic regimes demanding democracy on non-democratic regimes. Ironic and Paradoxical. ?
Fascinating. Thanks.
Just bought both of your books ❤
I also highly recommend Avi Shlaim's new memoir "Three Worlds: Memoirs of an Arab-Jew"
The guy who said Sand's book hadn't been peer reviewed is ridiculous - he stated that the factual aspects of his book were well known and even his critics acknowledged this- the only thing that he brings to the table is his analysis of those facts, which have been written about by his critics. History books come with footnotes, and it's very easy to obtain the data cited.
The Yeshiva University findings of a common genetic link among Jewish people, however, is not subject to peer review, and other scientists like Eran Elhaik of Johns Hopkins were denied access to Yeshiva's data because he proposed an alternate theory of Jewish origins. It's very strange for scientist not to share his data with other scientists, especially since the data would only bolster the genetic link hypothesis if it can stand up to scrutiny.
Climate science works this way too, lots of secret data and non-transparency.
Jonathan Hoffman..
The term Peleset (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in numerous Egyptian documents referring to a neighboring people or land starting from c.1150 BCE
You've read Wikipedia. Good.
Great stuff.
Apart from its agreement with France over the partition of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman empire, Britain had made promises during the war to other parties concerning the same area. In central Arabia, there was a standing British alliance with Abdul-Aziz Ibn Saud, the Wahhabi Emir of Riyad who was subsequently to become the founder of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism was a movement of militant Islamic religious revival which had appeared in central Arabia in the middle decades of the eighteenth century, and the house of Saud had been politically associated with it since that time. In conflict with this British-Saudi alliance was the wartime alliance reached between Britain and Sharif Husayn, the Emir of Mecca, who enjoyed a special Arab and Islamic prestige as a recognized descendant of the Prophet, and whose family were called the Hashemites.
In return for leading an Arab revolt against the Ottomans, the Sharif had been promised recognition as the head of an Arab kingdom the exact nature of which was left undefined. The Sharif, however, was led to understand that it would include all of Mesopotamia; all but a negotiable strip of coastal Syria; and the whole of peninsular Arabia, except for the parts which were already established as British protectorates. While the British relations with Ibn Saud were maintained by the British government of India, those with the Sharif were initiated and pursued by the British Arab Bureau in Cairo. Meanwhile, the British Foreign Office, in close touch with the World Zionist Organization, had by 1917 formally committed itself to viewing with favour the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine.
The British wartime commitment to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish National Home in the Palestine west of the Jordan, which again received high priority, was formalized in 1920 and included as a special article in the statutes of the British mandate for Palestine, as registered in the League of Nations. For the Palestine east of the Jordan, or Transjordan, a special administrative arrangement was soon made. In 1916, when Sharif Husayn solemnly declared the start of the Arab Revolt against the Turks in Mecca, he also proclaimed himself king of the Arabs, and the British actually recognized him as king of the Hijaz, which was the furthest they felt they could go at the time. After the war, however, Ibn Saud, with his Wahhabi forces, began to attack the Hijaz, and completed its conquest by putting an end to Sharifian rule there in 1925.
This conversation is still very relevant 10 yrs later. The only update that one can make today is that the two state solution is no longer viable, Israel killed it. So what should be done now?
There needs to be a intifada and this time it has to cause chaos to the point an agreement is made
@@haychhaych8377 What happens today...lol
both sides killed it ...the israelis by building settelments and the paestinians by being rejectionists ...
One state. The Palestine state of Israel within next 10years
@@AlfaBravo7777 Looks like WWIII
The work of these scholars should be essential readings in all academic programs at liberal faculties. Fortunately, more and more people are aware of the facts exposed here.
This is true, but the synthesis of Nationalism into Arab-Israeli politics has not been done by anyone except him, let alone at such a stunning quality.
Also, this man's bravery is to be admired in my opinion.
well done👍👍👍
I wish this was better quality video
Wonder why Avi stops at 1967 though
Thank you Shlomo and Avi , you really belongs to the special human on our planet 😊 unfortunately you are the minority but bring good signals
I disagree with Avi Shlaim about Israel's legitimacy came through a UN resolution. At no time did the UN process any sovereignty or any other right over Palestine, ie. the UN processed no power to decide the partition of Palestine, or to assign any part of its territory to a religious minority of alien immigrants in order to create a state of their own against the wishes of the majority of the population......Neither individually or collectively could the member of the the UN alienate, reduce or impair the sovereignty of the people of Palestine, or dispose of their land, or destroy by partition the territorial integrity of their country.
Israel's legitimacy can only come through the Palestinians, the sovereign owners, who, in 1988, recognized Israel right to exist on 78% of their land.
The "Palestinians" in 1948 was a reference to Jews & the others were referred to as Arabs until 1958 when the Arabs adopted the name as their own & the Jews became not Palestinian but "Israelis" in 1948. The native populations were miniscule and Arabs didn't own land titles much beyond 6% as Turks were the titled land holders. Most Arabs were their serfs. A big influx of Egyptian & Syrian landless peasants came in after WWI and they are the grandparents of today's Arab "Palestinians".
@@DEANMBLAKE I think you will find there were Arab Palestinian political parties in the early 1920s when Zionists were having a hard time convincing European Jewry - who were overwhelmingly opposed to Zionism -before the rise of nazism in 1932 Germany . Holocaust = Jewish Death , Zionist Life.
@@chugalongway01 1st Aliya was 1889. Western European Jews were not convinced but Eastern European Jews hadn't experienced any Emancipation. Russian Jewish charity bought 180,000 hectares in Golan & Barron Hirsch another 85,000 in Golan for settlements
@@DEANMBLAKE The Palestinian locals could have easily sent the Zionist settlers back to Poland if it wasn’t for British colonial sponsorship of the Zionist movement. When one talks about the Land Of Israel game you can’t ignore the Western powers that invented it and maintain it today.
@@chugalongway01 you misread history. The Brits say one thing & do another. Prior to and after the Balfour Declaration the Brits opposed Jewish Settlement. The Declaration was a forced anomoly. The Foreign Office didn't even know to whom it should be addressed & sent! By default someone suggested an important member of the Jewish community who was not involved at all!!! The document was dug up after Jews made their own moves to establish themselves. You are fishing for a rationale to justify the colonial narrative of Prof Sa'id. The Arabs bought British doubletalk & in the end there was no oil so they bailed out just like Regean bailed from Lebanon after the barracks bombing. Nothing in it for them but bad will after excluding Jews & deporting to Cyprus & the Holocaust became exposed.
Israel exists today by it own strengths. Your assumption of Israeli weaknesses that need to be protected are just old antisemitic tropes about weak Jews.
He's another yet another ' arrogant chosen' who is asking questions.
Avi Shlaim good example for the real origin Jews lived in Babylon and not the Jews of Khazar the khazarian the Ashkenazim
I think it is not connected; cause to me shlomo sun looks khazar and the points he mentioned are gold. I think educators elevates the person. These 2 are academics and knowledge opened their eyes wide open .
A Jew is a Jew, regardless of his ancestry, level of practice, or beliefs.
Why "will be destroyed", "will be terminated", "has to be removed"? Strong words but why in the third person. May be you should try. There has been a number of "surgeons" before. Don't miss your chance.
There are no 1967 borders. There is only the 1949 Armistice Demarcation Line. 'The armistice agreements were clear (at Arab insistence) that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian-Israeli agreement stated "The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question." The Jordanian-Israeli agreement stated: "... no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims, and positions of either Party hereto in the peaceful settlement of the Palestine questions, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations" (Art. II.2), "The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto." (Art. VI.9)'
thanx for the reminder ,in this messy business of jewish propaganda this point get perniciously omitted...
Since the time of that conference (2009), Israeli PM B. Netanyahu has confirmed what Professor Avi Shlaim stated about the responsibility of Netanyahu, the Likud and the settlements' land grabbing (watch by 20'57).
"Legal' and "lawful' are totally different with different definitions.
Because something is "legal" does not necessarily mean it is "lawful" and mutatis mutandis.
No, you're wrong Legal in accordance with regulations: synonyms: lawful, licit, legitimate, complaint. So yeah, both mean "within the law" So you would be wrong. His entering the premises was legal; his entering the premises was lawful?
+Oners82
You are a ......liar.
(WHAT a ...surprise!)
+Oners82
You can't reform reality.
Go ahead.... try.
Criminals try that all the time.
You CAN *imagine* how you would LIKE the way things would be but .........it changes absolutely nothing.
WHY are you refuting this?
Probably life-long brainwashed and pretty stupid is the best guess.
Oners82 How is the black's law dictionary wrong?????
+EHDROCK
Actually, I did mistake in my arguments with +Oners82.
Those with the threat of death or harm easily make the laws.
Watch ....*THE SOPRANOS*.
The.guy who read almost a whole sheet of paper shows disrespect for the whole process of civilised debate.
Why? He just raised his genuine questions.
@@Deluluissolulumadman there are other videos of Shlomo on YT and this knob head (Jonathan Hoffman) has the same aggressive attitude on all of them (yes he follows Shlomo around like a stalker) His point is to derail the conversation and shame the academics, not to provide any actual debate. In other words he's just a troll lol
I wish there was an official alliance between the new atheists and the new historians. (There was an unofficial one because of Christopher Hitchens).
Christopher Hitchens was the only good new atheist. The others are liberal Islamophobes who encourage Israel's colonization of Palestine.
@@danielcarvalho1453 Can we consider Hitchens to be an islamophobe as well since he was very much against Islam?
@@Deluluissolulumadman no, since Harris actually advocated for profiling of Muslims when there is no way to "look Muslim" so it's just a racist call to profile people based on skin color. Hitches said no such thing.
the new atheists are very limited intellectually and basically imbeciles compared to other real intellectuals and new historians. I'm not talking about racism or islamophobia. I don't care about those things in the literal sense to be completely honest. I just don't think that thinkers that can't go beyond those parameters should be considered good thinkers. Sam Harris is starting to use false data and he's slowly going the Jordan Peterson route.
Sand totally lost me at 47:25 . That was a stupid thing to say.
The analogy is stupid but his heart is in the right place
Shlomo? Oy Vey! His heart in the same place as everyone else. 👌
39:32 😉
...and Jordan IS the Palestinian State, duh.
After reading the Introduction of his book, “A Brief Global History Of The Left” , I have come to conclusion that he, i. e., Shlomo Sand, wants to become popular/ more popular among non-Communist ‘Left’.
She is quite misinformed.
Yeah, there is a lot of racists Sokol Jews
Terminology palestinains got created in 1964 by KGB from former USSR and Arafat from Egypt. in 1947 Jordan got created another arabs state on 70 % of Jewish land. After in 1946 Israel returned his original name, million Jews got robbed on thier properties, valubles, discriminated and forced out from arab countries. Israel is a tiny and ONLY Jewish state surrounded by 21 arab countries. After 1948 over million Jews got forced out from arab countries. There are over 2 milion arabs live in Israel as well as christians. Those Jews who returned to thier Jewish land they bought back thier land and rebuilt it into a beautiful state. Those who occupied or migrated to gaza, as well as those from Jewish land Judea and Samaria, should have rights to return to thier historical land in Egypt and reunite with thier extended families. Peace to all.
Absolute anti-history, biblical 'arguements', polemics, ideology and this wanna be wish for 'peace to all'.
Freedom for all native people everywhere who suffered and are still suffering at the hands of their oppressors who always try to justify their heinous crimes with whatever tools they can find
Also: Wow I've never heard of any country in the world having 26 other countries surrounding it 😮 haha
The hasbaresque grift is strong with this one. But honestly thx for making me laugh, I've never heard the KGB thing or the fact that there can be a country with 26 others surrounding it 😂
Adrean from the former Roman Empire Capturers renamed Jewish land into so called palestine in retaliation against Jews for resistance to occupation. Jesus was Jewish and born 2033 years ago in Jewish family, in Jewish city, on Jewish land occuped by former Roman Empire capturers. In 1948 Israel returned his original historical over 4000 year old name. If you never heard of someting, look at the map and study geography and history or at least go to the library. Facts and truth is important. Read Tora, Bible and Koran.
😂😁🤣 'facts and truth matter' --- proceeds to cite biblical 'facts'
Sands is a professor of Film History!!! He's qualified to critique the Three Stooges, of which he is the fourth.
Dean Blake what a childish comment you make dear Dean Blake.
Oh how clever! The exact same comment as you posted on the Frontline video of Sand and his book about why he stopped being a Jew. So you're a liar and a bore.
Show the whole world where the Jews who presently occupy Palestine were clasped in iron chains, and transported on ships as slaves which sailed to diverse foreign lands, as the Bible teaches?
@@ghosttruth90 read your Roman & Spanish histories. There are 3 person accounts. Jewish children were kidnapped to farm sugar in the Azores by the Spanish. 130,000 Jews were the masons who built the Colluseum. Nero used 6,000 Jewish slaves to start a canal across the Corintheum ismus. Read a book!
@@ruthanneschnell9815 I'm serious. He's pulled a Bruno Bettelheim. Sands' PhD in history is in the field of theater arts. He's a disgruntled mediocre who got booted from an Israeli university. He's like Prof. Arthur Koestler of Yale did as a self-hating Jew.
Sand has 0 historical understanding and she is just 'off'.
What an important contribution to the discussion.
...you are so eloquent sir.
Arab refusal is the bottom line... check out Ibn Saud w FDR 1945 after Yalta
There was no expulsion in 70 CE. If there was, what kind of Jewish population would be there to commit the Bar Kokhba revolt 60 years later? The evidence is clear, anyone who isn't completely brainwashed knows this.
The work of these scholars should be essential readings in all academic programs at liberal faculties. Fortunately, more and more people are aware of the facts exposed here.
I kind of agree on principle. Avi Shlaim has kept his dignity. Lovable and witty Shlomo Sand may be, but pictures of him hanging out with people like George Galloway, show a quality of naivete.
After reading the Introduction of his book, “A Brief Global History Of The Left” , I have come to conclusion that he, i. e., Shlomo Sand, wants to become popular/ more popular among non-Communist ‘Left’.