Monday, March 14, 2016

When Reality is Anti-Israel

Here we go again:

"McGraw-Hill Education has taken the unusual step of withdrawing a textbook and planning to destroy all copies of it - following criticism that four maps in the book are inaccurate and anti-Israel. The book is a political science textbook, Global Politics: Engaging a Complex World. The McGraw-Hill Education website no longer features the book. But a page on Amazon describes the book this way: 'This contemporary presentation stresses the importance of global events and offers students a number of lenses through which to view the world around them'." (McGraw-Hill Education withdraws textbook with maps viewed as anti-Israel, Scott Jaschik,, 8/3/16)

OK, let's just pause there.

"Inaccurate"? What, Jerusalem's Haifa and vice versa?

No, if that were the problem, you wouldn't be reading about this matter. The problem clearly has to do with the maps being "anti-Israel." And for our mysterious, faceless critics, anything anti-Israel is ipso facto inaccurate or... worse! And to hell with this namby pamby multi-lens approach to the world. There is only one lens for these guyz. But I digress...

"The book features 4 maps of what is now Israel, Gaza and the West Bank and say that it shows 'Palestinian loss of land' from 1946 to 2000."

Now we're getting close. There's a word there that is to these mysterious critics as garlic is to vampires.

Can you see it? Suffice it to say that it begins with the letter 'P'.

"Many Palestinian advocates agree with the maps, but many historians and supporters of Israel strongly disagree...."

Oh, I see, Scottie...

Advocates agree with the maps, but HISTORIANS (& supporters of Israel) disagree.

End of matter. After all, HISTORIANS (& supporters of Israel), have HISTORY on their side, and must be right, right?

And just so you get it, Scottie adds: "Supporters of Israel have fought the use of these maps elsewhere and quickly demanded urged McGraw-Hill to change or withdraw the textbook. Here is one such blog post which outlines objections to the maps and includes alternative ways to think about land in the region."

Thanks for putting us all on the ztraight and narrow, Zcottie.

And thanks, McGraw Hill for protecting our students from that awful creature, reality. Can't have that ugly bastard messing with their impressionable young minds, now can we?


Anonymous said...

I have heard of ratbags and zealots burning books, Israeli colonists aka 'settlers' burning christian bibles come to mind, but PUBLISHERS burning books at the behest of aforementioned ratbags and zealots is a new low.

p.s. happy to supply published details of the bible burning to any christian zionist reader.

Anonymous said...

Would the 'historians' who disagree with the maps please put up their hands,
or is this another self serving myth?

C'mon 'historians', a show of hands please.

Whenever I hear the words 'everyone' and 'no-one' used to bolster the debating point, just like the blanket term 'historians', I can identify a weak and pathetic argument.