Global, Israel, Politics

The myth of Palestinian textbook incitement?

In yesterday’s International Herald Tribune, Dr. Roger Avenstrup writes that the idea of Palestinian schools teaching hatred of Jews in their textbooks may be primarily a myth.

“It turns out that the original allegations were based on Egyptian or Jordanian textbooks and incorrect translations. Time and again, independently of each other, researchers find no incitement to hatred in the Palestinian textbooks”

He notes that the US Consulate General in Jerusalem commissioned studies from the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI) and that:

“The IPCRI 2003 report [PDF] states that the overall orientation of the curriculum is peaceful and does not incite to hatred or violence against Israel and the Jews, and the 2004 report [PDF] states that there are no signs of promoting hatred toward Israel, Judaism or Zionism, nor toward the Western Judeo-Christian tradition or values”

Coincidentally, ICPRI has also issued a report [PDF] on texts used in the Israeli educational system. Could the often repeated claims of incitement in Palestinian textbooks be an attempt to find some alternative explanation to the understandable rage felt by Palestinians living under decades of occupation?
Original article

49 thoughts on “The myth of Palestinian textbook incitement?

  1. Why do some palestinians hate Israel? Why do palestinians resist Israel’s occupation? Israel is a great place! it invented the taftafot! its girls are hot! even its soldiers look great in that uniform! its university system is public and one of the best in the world! Israel rocks!
    It must be incitement. they are raised to hate us. It cant have anything to do with the occupation. that would be a stretch.

  2. That depends which “occupation”. Gaza, 1967, 1948, or even before; they’re all called “occupation” by different Arabs.

  3. Ok . . . here’s another argument. But, I’ve seen a bunch of examples, physical, tangible examples of such, so I’m pretty skeptical.
    Besides, the description in the reports seems to be vague. In 2003 here’s this broad statement that could be interpreted different ways:
    “The curriculum undoubtedly bears the marks of unresolved (historical and contemporary) controversies both among Palestinians and with the neighbors of the
    emerging Palestinian state. As such, the textbooks do not openly or adequately reflect the multiethnic, multicultural and multi-religious history of the region.
    Furthermore, they do not present a multi-perspective account of several of the formative historical events and several of the still-unresolved issues (Jerusalem,
    water, borders, settlements and refugees).” (Page 5)
    “Inter-religious tolerance towards the followers of
    the other monotheistic religions, traditionally referred to as “Ahl al-Kitab” (the People of the Book), is emphasized in the framework of the teachings of Islam. In principle, these calls apply to both Christians and Jews. However, the textbooks fail to extend these principles and concepts to include Jews and to the State of Israel. In addition, and although the curriculum provides the opportunity for students to recognize and respect beliefs and practices of “others,” the concept of the “other,” in most cases, is limited to Christians.” (Page 5)
    “In particular, one notices a number of cases in which Judaism and the Jews are inadequately and inappropriately represented in relation to their
    presence in the region.” (Page 6)
    “Israel, as a sovereign state (political and geographic entity), is not clearly or adequately represented in the textbooks. Israel is referred to indirectly using different terms such as “the Land of the 1948”, “the Interior”, etc. In some contexts, Jews, in historical and modern-day contexts (occupation, Zionism, settlers) are negatively represented in Palestinian textbooks.” (Page 7)
    Furthermore, I’m not sure if this is important, but partisan topics are covered early on in Palestinian textbooks, where in Israeli ones a different approach is taken. From the Israeli report,
    “The latter three issues were covered mainly by the history textbooks. However, the history curriculum, whose aim is to structure the past and to create belongingness to the neighborhood, community, place of residence, country, etc., begins in 1st grade by
    focusing on those aspects that are closest to the child. From 6th grade onward the history of the Jewish People does not deal with the history of the Land of Israel up to the beginnings of Zionism – this subject is only dealt with in 9th grade.” (Page 3)
    It’s a compelling argument, but not enough to convince me that incitement does not exist. Sorry, John Brown, but you didn’t prove your case.

  4. Jared Goldberg wrote:
    It’s a compelling argument, but not enough to convince me that incitement does not exist. Sorry, John Brown, but you didn’t prove your case.
    Jared – If you go back and read closely I did not make any attempt to ‘prove a case’, nor did I claim incitement ‘does not exist’ or anything remotely resembling that. I merely pointed to the article and studies and asked a question.

  5. John Brown,
    If the rage is so understandable, where was their rage at Black September in Jordan? Where was their rage when 300,000 of them were evicted from Kuwait after years and years of working and building up that country? If this is about the “understandable rage” of the decades of occupation, what was it that caused the riots and murders against Jews of 1920, 1921, and 1929?
    I may be able to provide an answer to your non-suggestive post and innocent question after you provide a solid response to the above.
    Thanks.

  6. T_M – seems like you have any number of tangential discussions you’d rather turn towards than discuss this topic. That’s OK. If you don’t want to address it, I won’t twist your arm. However I will not allow myself to be distracted by your attempts at steering the discussion off course. If you want to discuss Black September, Kuwait, or the Hebron massacre then maybe you ought to start a new thread.

  7. John Brown consistently avoids responsibility for what he’s really trying to say. Notice the title of the post, “The myth of Palestinian textbook incitement?” What the fuck is the question mark for? The question mark leaves an escape when someone wants to discuss the opposing view. Jared Goldberg brought up a good point, and then all JB has to say is, “I merely pointed to the article and studies and asked a question.” Thereby completely avoiding all responsibility for his non-statements and making intelligent discussion impossible. This isn’t the first time.
    JB’s got no balls to back up any of his non-claims. He will “merely” announce the existence of an anti-zionistic or anti-religious study and not even claim that he believes it.

  8. Hi, I can’t start a new thread, so John, could you please start a new posting on Black September? Thanks, can’t wait to weigh in on it.

  9. John, that’s a nice cop-out and I understand that you have no answers. I’d post my own topic but I have no authority to do so here and I like my little village at Jewlicious.com anyway.
    If I understood your topic correctly, both from your original post and your (non)response to Jared Goldberg, your topic is that Palestinian textbooks do not incite hatred toward Israel, Zionism, Judaism, or Western values. You then posit the question that perhaps claims of incitement might be the result of “understandable” RAGE after years of living UNDER OCCUPATION.
    1. My question to you directly addressed your post. Directly. I gave you two examples of outrageous behavior toward the Palestinians that include both wholesale killing and wholesale ethnic cleansing. Shouldn’t there be “understandable rage” at those horrendous historical events?
    2. My other question also directly addresses your comments. If the “understandable rage” has anything to do with an “occupation,” then why was there Arab incitement and why were there violent Arab attacks on Jews in the Land of Israel/Mandate Palestine long before Israel existed or Jews had militias, guns or anything of the sort.
    What exactly did you wish to discuss if not these issues?
    Thanks.

  10. velvel wrote:
    John Brown consistently avoids responsibility for what he’s really trying to say.
    No, I take full responsibility for what I did say – 3 factual statements and then a question.
    Notice the title of the post, “The myth of Palestinian textbook incitement?” What the fuck is the question mark for? The question mark leaves an escape when someone wants to discuss the opposing view.
    No, a question mark is used to denote that a sentence is a question – nothing more and nothing less. If I meant to say that incitement in PA textbooks is a myth then I could have used a period or an exclamation point. What I said is that Avenstrup writes that it may be a myth, and if you want to take issue with that claim, then go ahead.
    T_M wrote:
    If I understood your topic correctly, both from your original post and your (non)response to Jared Goldberg, your topic is that Palestinian textbooks do not incite hatred toward Israel, Zionism, Judaism, or Western values.
    T_M you are once again trying (and failing) to put words in my mouth, when I have clearly already said that I made no such claim of “no incitement”.
    The essense of what I wrote was my question. My question which you don’t seem to be able to answer.
    “Could the often repeated claims of incitement in Palestinian textbooks be an attempt to find some alternative explanation to the understandable rage felt by Palestinians living under decades of occupation?”
    T_M continued:
    “[..snip T_M reintroduces previously rejected tangents..]
    What exactly did you wish to discuss if not these issues? ”
    I hoped to start a discussion on the issue of incitement in PA textbooks in 2004… not 1929 massacres, Kuwaiti actions in 1991, or other tangential topics.
    Now, do you have anything to say about Avenstrup’s article or not?

  11. Funny. After the JPPS library was fire bombed in Montreal, stormfront, et al, were quick to finger Jews as the shadowy figures behind the event. So much of their focus is discrediting Israel, kinda like John Brown.
    And it’s not his posts, links, etc., that are so bothersome. It’s his preoccupation, his sole focus. Once again, Brown…you’re a puke.

  12. Hey T_M, your little village misses you. Come Home.
    There’s no sense arguing with John Brown. In his little village, all evil stems from Zionism. But for Zionism, the Jews and the Arabs would live in blissful peace together, side by side, as neighbours and friends like they had prior to the advent of Zionism.
    And he’s kind of right. I mean no one stuck my family in Morocco into gas chambers. Pogroms and such were quite rare. Compared to our coreligionists in Europe, we got off easy.
    The only things the Arabs ever expected of us was that we knew our place. As long as we didn’t get to uppity, and didn’t assert ourselves or get the idea into our head that we could be equals, then we were warmly tolerated – kind of like the family pet.
    Zionism and the State of Israel changed all that. The existence of Jews as equals?? That’s far more offensive to the Arab / Islamic sensibility than Black September (Clan warfare) or the expulsion from Kuwait (desert justice). To John Brown and anyone else who will tolerate my existence as long as I don’t get to uppitty, I just have this to say: Blow me.
    Now come on home….

  13. shtreimel: As usual you’re way off-base and come off like a complete asshat in the process. This thread is about PA textbooks – and claims made about them in the media – not Israel (with the exception of the link to ICPRI’s report on Israeli texts, the purpose of which is not to ‘discredit’ Israel)

  14. ck wrote:
    There’s no sense arguing with John Brown. In his little village…
    I wasn’t trying to start an argument, so you’re right – there’s no sense in arguing.
    my little village… you mean Manhattan?
    ck continued:
    To John Brown and anyone else who will tolerate my existence as long as I don’t get to uppitty
    What dark, paranoid part of your brain did this come from? Dr. Freud would eat this loony comment up! Talk about delusional.

  15. Sweet John Brown, very sweet. At least your response wasn’t a spelling flame (too instead og to – 2 spellings of upitty in one post…), but in terms of it being compelling, you’re not that far off.
    Paranoid and delusional? Dude – I’ve read your stuff. Talk about projecting!
    I can say though that my comment had little to do with the original post and deals more with your world view. That would have made for a better response. But whatever …

  16. People who havent learnt in israeli educational system, vevel, might not be aware of the fact that the map of israel as usually presented to students does not differentiate between the occupied territories and israel per se. so i dont understand why you expect any better from the palestinian textbooks (see first link)?

  17. “…: As usual you’re way off-base”
    Brown,
    The fact that I find your world-view, represented by your posts and vile site, nauseating is a personal opinion. What is “off-base” about that?

  18. Asaf: Because it’s our fucking land, that’s why there’s no delineation. When a Palestinian state gets declared, it will be on our land. The state will be created because of our historically unprecedented largesse towards a hostile and recalcitrant people, WHO LOST WAR AFTER WAR. I’m tired of making excuses. Take fucking Gaza, take a big chunk of Yehuda and Shomron, take Hebron and mearat hamachpelah, take Gush Etzion and the ghosts of massacred Jews and all the other sites that are precious to us – just shut the fuck up already!
    Seriously, has there ever been a more chutzpahdick and out and out whiny people than the Palestinians? Mapik kvar, nim’as li!

  19. Incitement 101
    The incitement is there but not in the text books… the incitement comes by way of the media (usually PA owned or controlled). This is both good and bad… bad in that there is incitement, good in that in order to stop it all you need to do is start making different shows, not rewrite an entire state’s textbooks.

  20. Asaf: Because it’s our fucking land, that’s why there’s no delineation. When a Palestinian state gets declared, it will be on our land. The state will be created because of our historically unprecedented largesse towards a hostile and recalcitrant people, WHO LOST WAR AFTER WAR. I’m tired of making excuses. Take fucking Gaza, take a big chunk of Yehuda and Shomron, take Hebron and mearat hamachpelah, take Gush Etzion and the ghosts of massacred Jews and all the other sites that are precious to us – just shut the fuck up already!
    Seriously, has there ever been a more chutzpahdick and out and out whiny people than the Palestinians? Mapik kvar, nim’as li!

  21. T_M you are once again trying (and failing) to put words in my mouth, when I have clearly already said that I made no such claim of “no incitement”.
    I guess you and I interpret “Dr. Roger Avenstrup writes that the idea of Palestinian schools teaching hatred of Jews in their textbooks may be primarily a myth” differently, especially when you follow with a quote that says “researchers find no incitement to hatred in the Palestinian textbooks.”
    Yup, there was no intention on your part to make a claim of no incitement, merely to quote passages and links that say it and to add your own comment that it may be a myth.
    At least you said “may.”
    “Could the often repeated claims of incitement in Palestinian textbooks be an attempt to find some alternative explanation to the understandable rage felt by Palestinians living under decades of occupation?”
    I hoped to start a discussion on the issue of incitement in PA textbooks in 2004… not 1929 massacres, Kuwaiti actions in 1991, or other tangential topics.
    Now, do you have anything to say about Avenstrup’s article or not?

    Well, actually, I do. The answer to your question is:
    1. no. The often repeated claims of incitement in Palestinian textbooks ARE NOT an attempt to find some alternative explanation to the “understandable rage” felt by Palestinians living under decades of occupation. They are valid claims of incitment and the reasons for the incitement are not all that mysterious, although they are far from “understandable.”
    2. If you look at my comments again, you will note they are far from tangenital. They address your loaded, biased question by commenting on whether the rage is “understandable” or is caused by the “decades of occupation.”
    If you had bothered to answer my questions, instead of adroitly ignoring them, then you would come up against the inevitable conclusion that the “often repeated claims of incitement” are not only correct but are caused by the hypocritical rage of the Palestinians.
    Get it? The “rage” is not “understandable” if it doesn’t exist where worse crimes against Palestinians do not merit the same venom, hatred, violence or sickeningly hostile education.
    Furthermore, you would realize that the second part of your assertion, that the occupation is causing this rage is completely invalid if there was “rage” and incitement as far back as the days when Jews represented 10% of the population and there was no state to occupy anybody.
    On the other hand, congratulations, you have managed to keep this discussion going when we could have killed it in its youth had you simply addressed my very pertinent questions.

  22. Assaf, your comments are not valid for the state and state religious schools, on;y for the Ultra-Orthodox schools:
    The atlas most commonly used in the State and State Religious schools continues to include a map which shows the area of the West Bank with its division into Areas A, B and C. In the 2002 edition the map of the areas of the Autonomy is updated to include the latest changes. (see Appendix I)
    In the other atlas the “Area of the Palestinian Autonomy” is colored gray within the map of Israel. On the physical maps in both atlases the political borders with Jordan and Egypt are marked, without any indication of the green line.
    Use of multidisciplinary textbooks
    There is a growing tendency to use multi-disciplinary textbooks that integrate history, geography, environmental studies, archeology and Jewish thought in an effort to encompass multi-faceted and complex issues.
    B: Ultra-Orthodox Stream
    There is a marked difference between the textbooks of the State and State Religious schools and those of the ultra-Orthodox stream, whose approach to sensitive issues continues to highlight trends contrary to those listed above.
    The differences detailed in the previous report still exist.
    Language is used that conveys an air of superiority and negative expressions appear.
    The map of Israel always includes all of the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan. Many of the textbooks show maps of the Middle East on which only Israel’s name appears, the territories of the surrounding Arab countries being depicted without indication of their names.

    http://www.edume.org/reports/8/1.htm
    Tom C., while you are right about other forms of incitement, if you read the IPCRI site, you’ll see the incitement also exists within the textbooks.

  23. Incitement 101
    The incitement is there but not in the text books… the incitement comes by way of the media (usually PA owned or controlled). This is both good and bad… bad in that there is incitement, good in that in order to stop it all you need to do is start making different shows, not rewrite an entire state’s textbooks.

  24. JB,
    I’m practically convinced. I now know that the Israeli propaganda machine tells us more lies than not. The Palestinians are turning toward peace and waiting for a partner on our side. Are we up to take advantage of this historical occasion?
    If you have an answer, email me. In the meantime, I’ll be at friends on their hilltop outpost helping them spruce up their garden. Just in time for Tu b’shvat, everyone can help out too: http://www.trees4yesha.org/

  25. T_M: I am talking from personal anecdotal experience only. I went to modern orthodox schools and non-religious schools. many of the maps dont include the green line. I prefer ck’s response because it is closer things actually are.

  26. asaf, once there is an official palestinian state, im sure it will be included. but right now the land is disputed, so even though many of the schools might not acknowledge that, it’s not like they are not recognizing the existence of another COUNTRY.

  27. the history i received in israel was many times no more than propaganda and history out of context. i really dont expect any better from the palestinian or any other group in a political struggle. well i do.. 🙂 but i find people blaming only palestinians or only israel for such propaganda – very hypocritical.

  28. warning, warning: asaft is a militant antiisraeli, currently taking muslim conversion classes, he deserted the israeli army and fled israel to avoid the hard times of his former compatriots – anything he says should be viewed as coming from the eyes of a traitor to israel and to judaism.

  29. Yes Asaf, our land. Not theirs.
    I know you think this makes me sound like some kind of fanatic nutter, but I’m not. I am all in favour of territorial compromise for the sake of peace. I think it should have happenned a long time ago too – it would have made for a great post-sinai segue. But yeah. It’s our land, not theirs. Not at all.
    I hope they appreciate the sacrifice we are making, but I’m afraid they might not. I hope they settle down ASAP and start to focus on their national and personal well being instead of celebrating a cult of death. I’m skeptical but hopeful, because oy vay voy lahem if they don’t stop fucking around …

  30. I have to say…CK’s posts make me wanna drop all this PC bullshit and scream it like it really is. I appreciate your chutzpah CK.

  31. You know CK, they think it’s all their land too. They say they compromised on 78% of Palestine in 1988 when they recognized the existence and legitimacy of Israel. Now you say you are compromising on Yesha by “giving it back.”
    You have to admit that if one weren’t Jewish or Arab, it would pretty much seem like two irreconcilably lunatic sides were going at each other here.

  32. And you sound like Chamberlain, John Brown.
    Reread what he wrote, and then go read the Hamas Charter and get back to us.
    Oh wait, you won’t because that’s another tangent that proves another claim you’ve made look ridiculous and wrong…
    CK, come home to Jewlicious…

  33. Well John Brown, there’s a certain honesty about Hamas isn’t there? I mean, say what you will about them, they are at least very straightforward and honest about their aims and their motivations. I may not like them much, and they sure as heck don’t like me, but with Hamas, what you see is what you get. I can respect that a lot more than I can respect people who couch all kinds of sinister motivations behind nice words and supposedly lofty higher ideals.
    And Sam? They can think whatever they like. They continue to be there because unlike what any other victorious nation with an overwhelmingly superior military would have done, we let them stay. I really wouldn’t have it any other way – but I am not so naive to think that had the tables been turned, their kindness would match ours. In any case, let’s hope I never have to find out whether I’m right about that or not. Me? An irreconcilable lunatic? Hardly. I’d be thrilled to live in Peace with them. I beg, pray and urge them every day to challenge me with peaceful coexistence.

  34. HOGWASH.
    One of the agrrements at Oslo was to reform the Palestinian Education system. One of the primary problems behind the Palestinians is the hatred taught to them from a young age.
    There are polls done on the children as to how many would love to be Shahids (martyrs) the numbers are scary.
    If you belive the media’s assertion that the Palestinans school books are “peaceful” I’ve got a couple of bridges to sell you.
    For a comprehensive source see http://www.honestreporting.com

  35. Since both sides are right, and wrong. And there is propaganda on both sides and insitement on both sides. I propose we kill everyone on the land and let John Brown and Asaf Velvel and Avi Green go over there fight it out and when we have a single survivor they get to make the decision as to who get to repopulate the land.
    Either that or lets just turn the land over to the UN, we know they are trust worthy and help to the underpriviledged.

  36. Oh, and I think we should televise the “Battle of the Extremists.” After all why waste that kind of entertainment.

  37. what the antisemites brown and asaf dont want you to read, from wednesdays iht:
    Since the hatred in the Palestinian textbooks was exposed and world pressure was mounted to eliminate the hatred, various defenders of the curriculum, like Roger Avenstrup (“Where is all that ‘incitement?”‘ Views, Dec. 18) have surfaced, legitimizing the problematic education.
    Anti-Semitism is presented openly in Palestinian education. In the new 6th grade book “Reading the Koran” children read about Allah’s warning to the Jews that because of their evil Allah will kill them.
    .
    In other sections Palestinians learn of Jews being expelled from their homes by Allah, and in another Jews are said to be like donkeys: “Those [Jews] who were charged with the Torah, but did not observe it, are like a donkey carrying books. …” Palestinian children are left with the impression that the Koran sees the Jews as an enemy of God, and consequently their enemy as well.
    .
    In the new textbooks, Israel is delegitimized as a state. Israel is portrayed as a foreign colonial occupier: “Colonialism: Palestine faced the British occupation after the First World War in 1917, and the Israeli occupation in 1948… ”
    .
    When the state of Israel is an “occupation” it is a logical step to define all of Israel’s cities, regions and natural resources as being part of “Palestine.” Israel’s land is called the “stolen homeland,” Israel’s creation the “catastrophe” and an encyclopedia is cited that was written for Palestinians “so that they would remember their stolen homeland and work for its salvation…”
    .
    Denying recognition of Israel’s existence is cemented through tens of maps in the schoolbooks in which “Palestine” encompasses all of Israel.
    .
    Completing the dangerous messages of the new books is the teaching that Israel must be destroyed as religious obligation:
    .
    “Islam encourages this [love of homeland] and established the defense of it as an obligatory commandment for every Muslim if even a centimeter of his land is stolen. I, a Palestinian Muslim, love my country Palestine…”
    .
    The results of this delegitimization is a belief frequently expressed by Palestinian children that justice can be achieved only through Israel’s destruction.
    .
    It should be stressed that all these new Palestinian schoolbooks cited were written during the most optimistic periods of the peace process, before the violence began in September 2000. They are not a response to the war but an expression of dangerous ideology that has to be replaced if there will ever be peace. The ongoing attempts to defend these Palestinian Authority schoolbooks are tragic, as the Palestinian Authority is using these arguments to justify their curriculum and refusing to improve their books. The Palestinian Authority is planting the seeds of the next war in their youth. The defenders of Palestinian hate education are protecting those seeds of war.
    Roger Avenstrup blithely writes that the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information contends that the overall orientation of the Palestinian curriculum is “peaceful.” Curiously enough, however, when one reads the IPCRI reports, a different message is given.
    .
    The IPCRI actually says: “Until now, the Palestinian Authority text books have not provided evidence that the Palestinian Authority has been implementing a policy of peace making.” It goes on to say, “it is not difficult to come to the understanding that the main political theme imparted to the students is that Israel should not exist and that is essentially the Palestinian goal.”
    .
    For example, a statement in the November 2004 IPCRI report says, “In Palestinian text books dealing with Islamic studies – concepts such as Jihad and martyrdom are presented in contexts that suggest being supportive and encouraging young people to admire both the concept of suicide bombing aimed at killing Israelis, as well as to consider the possibility of becoming suicide bombers themselves.”
    .
    In selective culling of facts from the reports, Avenstrup asserts a position that is untenable if the full reports from IPCRI, the U.S. Senate and the European Union were read in detail.
    .
    so the assholes brown and asaf find an article written by a fellow antisemite, and post it as if true. intellectual debate wont work with scum, total shunning might

  38. from camera.org, quoting the report itself:
    November 2004 report
    This report completely undermines Avenstrup’s argument, and he ignores it altogether. In short, the report finds:
    Palestinian text books have confused messages and it is not difficult to come to the understanding that the main political theme imparted to the students is that Israel should not exist and that is essentially the Palestinian goal.
    In addition, the “Background to the Document” notes:
    In Palestinian text books dealing with Islamic studies – concepts such as Jihad and martyrdom are presented in contexts that suggest being supportive and encouraging young people to admire both the concept of suicide bombing aimed at killing Israelis, as well as to consider the possibility of becoming suicide bombers themselves. . . .
    It should be mentioned, that in our view, some of the [international and Israeli] reports and some of the motivation for writing the reports were part of the anti-Palestinian propaganda campaign waged by various right-wing Israeli and pro-Israeli groups, nevertheless, the substantive critiques with quotations and hard evidence cannot and should not be ignored by the Palestinian Authority as a mere anti-Palestinian propaganda campaign . (Emphasis added.)
    The document goes into greater detail about these and additional problems in the sections called “Palestine,” “Dealing with the ‘Other,’” “Dealing with Islamic Texts and Concepts,” and “Dealing with Jerusalem.”
    In addition, this report dispels the common propaganda repeated by Avenstrup that “the original allegations [of incitement] were based on Egyptian or Jordanian textbooks.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.