❮Reading❯ ➻ From Beirut To Jerusalem ➳ Author Thomas L. Friedman – Saudionline.co.uk

From Beirut To Jerusalem txt From Beirut To Jerusalem, text ebook From Beirut To Jerusalem, adobe reader From Beirut To Jerusalem, chapter 2 From Beirut To Jerusalem, From Beirut To Jerusalem ad398f This Extraordinary Bestseller Is Still The Most Incisive, Thought Provoking Book Ever Written About The Middle East Thomas L Friedman, Twice Winner Of The Pulitzer Prize For International Reporting, And Now The Foreign Affairs Columnist On The Op Ed Page Of The New York Times, Drew On His Ten Years In The Middle East To Write A Book That The Wall Street Journal Called A Sparkling Intellectual Guidebook An Engrossing Journey Not To Be Missed Now With A New Chapter That Brings The Ever Changing History Of The Conflict In The Middle East Up To Date, This Seminal Historical Work Reaffirms Both Its Timeliness And Its Timelessness If You Re Only Going To Read One Book On The Middle East, This Is It Seymour Hersh


About the Author: Thomas L. Friedman

Thomas L Friedman is an internationally renowned author, reporter, and, columnist the recipient of three Pulitzer Prizes and the author of six bestselling books, among them From Beirut to Jerusalem and The World Is Flat.Thomas Loren Friedman was born in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on July 20, 1953, and grew up in the middle class Minneapolis suburb of St Louis Park He is the son of Harold and Marga



10 thoughts on “From Beirut To Jerusalem

  1. says:

    If you re sick and tired of what a pedantic wind bag Thomas Friedman has become since his stupid lexus olive tree epiphany, take a trip back to when he was less pedantic, less wind baggish, and could make a point without the use of a dozen unnecessary, self aggrandizing anecdotes.From Beirut to Jerusalem is entertaining, well written, poignant, and a great primer to middle eastern Israeli Palestinian affairs The Beirut section of the book is a bit better than the Jerusalem section I get the feeling he had different editors for each , but overall it remains indispensable reading.


  2. says:

    According to one cynical goodreads reviewer, From Beirut to Jerusalem offers some insight into two sets of idiots killing each other over a piece of dirt My instinctive reaction when I read this was to feel sorry for this reviewer who clearly doesn t know what it means to have a homeland, and to be so deeply invested in it as to be willing to die for it My husband pointed out that the reviewer may actually know what it s like to have a homeland What the reviewer doesn t know is what it s like to have it taken away a defining experience to which both Israelis and Palestinians lay claim.This is but one of many divides between American culture and what s going on in the Middle East, which is why Americans may never truly understand what s happening there I feel that this book is an excellent attempt at bridging that gap Friedman writes clearly, and you come away from the book feeling like your understanding of Middle Eastern history and politics has both deepened and broadened greatly For that alone, it s a great book I admit that my feelings toward Israel as a Zionistic Jew currently living here in Israel tend to be emotional and irrational, and I m aware that it was with no small measure of hypersensitivity and defensiveness that I read Friedman s criticisms of Israeli behavior I do applaud Friedman s efforts to put his Jewish origins aside and report objectively on what goes on in the region Objectivity and accuracy are important in journalism, even if this means that I won t always like what the writer has to say.I wonder, though, whether Friedman goes too far in the other direction I believe that he has succeeded in overcoming feelings for Israel that would lead him to see Israel s actions through rose colored glasses and to report the news in a way that attempts to justify them Instead, his reaction is frequently one of anger when Israel disappoints him and makes him ashamed of his Jewish identity an equally personal and emotional reaction, and no less biased.Friedman writes the following about his exclusive interview with Major General Amir Drori, the Israeli commander in Lebanon, following the Phalangist massacres at Sabra and Shatila which took place under the Israeli army s watch I must admit I was not professionally detached in this interview I banged the table with my fist and shouted at Drori, How could you do this How could you not see How could you not know But what I was really saying, in a very selfish way, was How could you do this to me, you bastards I always thought you were different I always thought we were different I m the only Jew in West Beirut What do I tell people now What do I tell myself So the next morning I buried Amir Drori on the front page of the New York Times, and along with him every illusion I ever held about the Jewish state p 166 I m not trying to justify what happened in Sabra and Shatila Drori arguably deserved to be buried But there was clearly a personal agenda here for Friedman, just as personal as a pro Zionist agenda would have been Friedman writes with plain disgust about the indignities suffered by the Palestinians under Israeli occupation, an occupation which, incidentally, began after Israel won the territories in a war fought for self defense The chapter where Friedman describes this is replete with anecdotes and quotes from victimized Palestinians and bullying Israelis In contrast, Friedman compares the Palestinian challenge to Israel to a poke in the ribs He goes on in the very next sentence to say Palestinians planted bombs in Israeli supermarkets, on their airplanes, under the seats of their buses, and even in an old refrigerator in the heart of Jerusalem They hijacked their airplanes, murdered their Olympic team, and shot up their embassies p 347 Some poke in the ribs Ever ridden on a bus where a suspicious package is discovered I have So have my children But that experience doesn t compare to riding a bus where the suspicious package remains undiscovered It goes way beyond a poke in the ribs, I can tell you Interviews with people who have lost arms, legs, or children to this poke in the ribs were woefully missing from Friedman s account, as was a fair effort to place oppressive Israeli behavior in context For example, in one particularly painful anecdote Friedman describes a Palestinian man interrupted during an intimate moment with his wife by Israeli soldiers who have come to arrest him The soldier telling the story admits to wolfishly eying the wife as the husband dresses to accompany them What Friedman doesn t tell us is what the Palestinian man had done to deserve his arrest Would the anecdote read the same way if we were also informed that this man was directly involved in innocent civilian murders I don t know what the man s charges were or whether they were justified, but the complete omission of the context surrounding his arrest makes the story seem very one sided.Israeli arrests of Palestinians were generally painted by Friedman with a broad brush as largely unwarranted, paranoid behavior by Israelis I m not saying this is never the case But I do think it s complicated than Friedman makes it sound In contrast, behavior by various Lebanese groups in Beirut which might seem unfathomable to a Westerner was carefully explained by Friedman and rendered almost understandable, if not sympathetic.I don t want to overstate my case Friedman does discuss Western hyper scrutiny and quick judgment of Israel, and factors which go into over reporting by the media of Israeli mistakes He defends Israeli behavior occasionally, or at least explains it And I m sure that if I could get hold of Edward Said s review of this book, I would get some perspective on Friedman s possible unfairness in the other direction as well Finally, as I said, I know that my objectivity when it comes to this issue is sharply limited.Overall, I m glad I read the book From Beirut to Jerusalem both expanded and deepened my knowledge of what s going on around me, and I think it s important for me to start gathering the facts and not just the experiences My understanding of my position as a Jew here in Israel is far complex now than it was before I read the book And the book is readable as well as informative I whipped through its 500 pages pretty quickly My husband, who is better informed than I am on these issues, summed it up well when he told me that he feels Friedman s perspective is a legitimate one but it s one of many legitimate perspectives out there And now, I want to read some others My increasing desire to read further on the subject may be the greatest testimony to the book s worth.


  3. says:

    From Beirut to Jerusalem by Tom Friedman won the National Book Award for Non Fiction in 1989.Lebanon was once known as the Switzerland of the Middle East, a land of mountains, money, and many cultures, all of which somehow miraculously managed to live together in harmony At least that was the picture postcard view It was not the Lebanon that greeted Ann and me in June 1979 We came to a country that had been in the grip of a civil war since 1975 Our first evening at the Beirut Commodore Hotel I remember lying awake listening to a shootout right down the street It was the first time I had ever heard a gun fired in my lifeThis book had all the ingredients from which Friedman could draw on to write a profound book Firstly, Friedman lived for a decade in Lebanon and Israel while working as the New York Times Middle East correspondent Not many people can make that claim as a writer that they were on assignment for ten years in a foreign land So he knows his material really well.Secondly, Friedman arrived during the 1980s while history was being made The rise of the PLO and the crackdown by Israel ushered in a significant period in world history, certainly a vital period in the Middle East A lot of violence occurred while Friedman was in Beirut including the bombing of the U.S Marine Compound in Beirut in 1983 However it was while leaving Israel for a new job in Washington that his windshield was shattered by a rock throwing Palestinian which caused him to write this How ironic, I thought afterward I had seen marching armies of many nations pass through Beirut and ultramodern jets clash above the skies I had seen the battleship New Jersey fire shells as big as Chevrolets, and I had seen my own apartment house reduced to dust by a pound of the most sophisticated high explosives known to man I had seen massacres and car bombings and heard snipers until they had almost become routine I had dodged them all for ten years, only to get hit by a stone.Friedman writes about the Israeli Palestine conflict with a sense of boyish wonder, but not na vet He did not opine on how to solve the conflict He just reported and contextualized his experiences while in the middle of it all Rabin, Sharon, Arafat were all central players in the drama He also wrote of the holocaust and the history of Palestine in small but relevant doses Lastly, Friedman produced a lot of facts and anecdotes and he had interviews with powerful leaders that kept the book entertaining He was able to remain balanced in his views although he has some disdain for authoritarian figures to be sure Friedman did come under fire by some for empathizing with the Palestinians despite his own Jewish heritage I only have one small criticism of the book there are only two, largely useless, maps of Lebanon and Israel 5 stars While three decades of history have passed since this work was first published, it is masterfully wrought and remains a surprisingly fresh and insightful read It is a bit long at than 600 pages but worth it.


  4. says:

    It was an Israeli friend who told me that if I wanted to understand today s Middle East, I should read this book The author is well qualified as a guide to the region s complexities Friedman, who is Jewish and studied Hebrew as a child, as a teen spent a vacation in an Israeli Kibbutz He started studying Arabic as well, and fell in love with Egypt after a two week visit on his way to a semester at Hebrew University Less than two years later he was taking Arabic courses at the American University in Cairo After college he earned a Masters at Oxford in Middle Eastern Studies then, he became a reporter In Beirut In the midst of their civil war He d spend almost five years there, winning a Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of the massacre at Sabra and Shatilia camps When American marines were slaughtered in their Beirut barracks, Friedman was on scene watching the bomb s mushroom cloud rise overhead He d then spend almost four years as the Jerusalem Bureau Chief for the New York Times.I ve read criticisms of Friedman s style as risible, with mixed metaphors and outlandish analogies I didn t really notice in the Beirut portion of the book, and I usually do I think it s that the story he had to tell was so riveting, I didn t trip up on that I just glided right through When you re reading about an Israeli officer being confronted in Beirut with three boxes, one filled with heads, another with torsos and another with limbs or read of how the parrot at the bar of the Commodore Hotel rendered a perfect imitation of the whistle of an incoming shell, it s not style that draws your attention I certainly found this book very readable and well paced in that first half of the book I admit I did start noticing the plethora of analogies in the Jerusalem portion Maybe because a Hobbesian hell like Beirut rivets your attention than the stories of a functioning democracy Maybe it s that the Beirut portions seemed built on personal experience and observations, while the Jerusalem portions based on interviews with others Maybe it s that his stylistic tics, as some reviewers suggest, increased over time and the Beirut portions were based on material written earlier For whatever reason, I did find the second half of the book less compelling, and the style much irksome.Friedman seemed to me very even handed He certainly took to task not just Arabs, but the Israelis and the Americans for a generous share of the blame Some reviewers pegged him as a Neo Con, but given his insistence there will be no peace until Israeli settlers are withdrawn from the West Bank, his account of the Israeli occupation there, and his criticism of the Reagan and first Bush administrations, he hardly came across to me that way, and the Goodreads bio taken from the Wiki described him as left leaning I don t think he s so easily labeled, at least not in this book He identifies three forces that drive much of the madness of the Middle East, and interestingly it isn t religion, or at least religion per se, which he blames Even when it comes to Islamic Fundamentalism, he believes it is at root a secular socioeconomic problem He points to three conflicting and competing forces tribalism, authoritarianism, and nationalism particularly in the context of how the colonial powers drew very artificial lines when in the aftermath of World War I the Middle Eastern states were established I may not always agree with Friedman s analysis or his solutions, but certainly his account of his time in the Middle East makes for a good primer on the nations of the Middle East and their conflicts, even though almost a quarter of a century has passed since the original publication And the 2012 edition I read had an interesting Afterword on the events that have passed since, particularly Friedman s thoughts on the Arab Spring and its opportunities and dangers This may not be the last word on the subject of the contemporary Middle East, but it s not a bad place to start.


  5. says:

    I used to follow and read Thomas Friedman s columns regularly Thought he was a pretty interesting guy even if I didn t subscribe to his politics But he became a bloated, pompous caricature of a journalist as he turned out junk like The World is Flat, The Sky is Blue, The Sea is Salty well maybe the last two aren t real but he has a bunch of similar sounding books I decided to go back to his first book From Beirut to Jerusalem to see how he got his start I figured it would be a less slanted, unbiased, open eyed look at the world before he got sucked up into the collective that is the current NYT I was wrong He freely admits his intention to slant his stories about Israel s Lebanon invasion because he was so betrayed in his Israel on a pedestal views This book is not what I expected and hoped for, a history of the region and why it is in conflict This is a Tom s excellent adventure in Beirut and Jerusalem, mainly about him and his travels It is also very focused on the personalities of the day, which is understandable because he was the reporter on the scene The book does not travel the span of time well.I give props to Friedman, he has some cojones going to report on the Lebanese civil war as his first big assignment A Jew in Beirut, he figures no one would suspect him of being jewish there Pretty ballsy But he quickly disabuses me of the idea he is an honest reporter Short version of his reporting the PLO is good hearted but amateurish and unsophisticated in an appealing way the Maronite Christians are Beirut s corrupt version of the mafia, evil and untrustworthy the Sunni Muslims are mysterious and vaguely honorable the Shia are somewhat na ve and trusting but rising up in justified anger and the Israelis are lying devils invading poor, innocent Lebanon I found him cold his unemotional description of the death of his employee s wife and daughter who were babysitting his Beirut apartment during a particularly dangerous time and were blown up by warring factions struck me his tossing off of the gassing of Iraqi Kurds by Saddam as just how strong leaders dealt with uppity tribes the Hama rules of Hafez al Assad His treatment of the PLO and Arafat in Lebanon was very sympathetic His treatment of Lebanese society seemed like caricatures.He moves to Jerusalem and reports on Israel Again I found his writing very slanted He describes one incident where a Jewish man is pelted by stones as he is driving The man stops to get revenge on the Palestinian boys who could have killed him Friedman witnesses the event but says the reason the man was so upset was because he would have to pay 250 to repair his windshield Are you freakin kidding me The book does give a nuanced view of the society with its warring factions over how to deal with the West Bank and Gaza Also the friction between the secular and the religious populations is decent I found his explanation of the first intifada interesting as he brings out the impacts on both sides This part of the book was ok.Finally, Friedman can t resist putting up his own solution to end the conflict What is needed is an Israeli bastard for peace who will take the chance and give the West Bank and Gaza over to the Palestinians so they can have a home of their own Working out really well in the case of Gaza now, isn t it Tom The river to the sea is not an empty slogan, the Palestinians will never be satisfied until the entire state of Israel is gone For a better history and assessment of the region, read The High Cost of Peace How Washington s Middle East Policy Left America Vulnerable to Terrorism.2 Stars in recognition of Friedman s guts to live and report in the region.


  6. says:

    Knowing nothing or Friedman I found it interesting that I was ridiculed for having this book in hand I guess that s what you get for bringing Neo Con Zionist literature to an internship in Palestine My only prior knowledge of the book was that it covered the recent history of the Middle East with a heavy emphasis on the Palestinian and Israeli conflict I thought I d dive in for a bit of education During the first half of the book, Friedman s profession is made very clear, both through his writing, and his writing style He talks at great lengths of himself as a journalist but also does a great job of reporting on the tumultuous period in Lebanese history Knowing nothing of these conflicts, I appreciated his presentation of their development and, especially, America s involvement.By the time Friedman, and the book, move on to Jerusalem, my interest slowly slipped away Honestly, it was hard to go into the text objectively as those around me continued to tell me how horrible it was, despite never having read the book in full themselves But, here s what I got out of it.Unlike Beirut, Friedman presents little fact based history on the development of the Israeli State Instead, he focuses on the ideological reasons that the country came about, and the implications that these reasons have for a visiting American Jew An interesting perspective if you re curious as to how Friedman deals with his own religion, but not so much outside of that.As the book dives deeper into the Palestinian and Israeli divide, Friedman isolates himself as a strong supporter of Israel While, yes, he makes claims of wanting peace, and recognizing the difficulty of the process, the way in which he frames the situation is, well, antagonistic I understand that the book was written at the height of the First Intifada, but, even so, continually referring to a people as a collective enemy is not only unscholarly but outright ignorant Isn t creating us versus them how wars start Not how they end The dichotomy he creates, and adheres to, speaks worlds for his political views and unwillingness to accept the fact that there is a nation of people who have been routinely oppressed by the creation of the State of Israel I cannot fathom how, or why, as a highly revered journalist, he can get away with the hypothetical speeches he has imagined Prime Ministers deliver at the end of the book To be so brazen, so negative, so hateful I am amazed that he is still so highly regarded Perhaps his writing since the publication of this book has been objective Or, perhaps, it hasn t, and that s exactly what America wants, or thinks it wants.Ouch.Now I know why I was mocked for reading it I don t regret it, I just won t ever go back to it


  7. says:

    A one sided extremely biased book Mr Friedman You could have done a much better job had you relayed the views of both conflicting parties of the Lebanese war Blaming all the miseries on one side only while picturing the other side as the innocent victim only accentuates your incomprehension of the reasons that led to the war, or maybe reflects the result of an inflated pocket


  8. says:

    S ng ng, tr n y th ng tin, ch n th c th ch a r , nh ng c r t h p d n


  9. says:

    4.5 5 The first half of the book deals with the Civil War in Lebanon Was greatly reminded of the situation in Afghanistan that I learnt by reading Ahmed Rashid s acclaimed Taliban Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia Half a dozen tribes sects and each of them in war with every1 else and the neighbours getting involved to burn their hands Also realised that Friedman s skill of insightful narration with anecdotes is unparalleled Finally, understood what it was about.The second half is on the Israel Palestine conflict Again the author discusses Zionism, the various sections of the Israeli society, the roots of the conflict,the intifada, its media coverage in the West and the relations between America and Israel in some depth Was dry for a while in between but mostly interesting Also liked that views and experiences of a number of people have been recorded as in a travelogue.Cant say it enough, have seen an author as perceptive with such a great eye on the big picture as Thomas Friedman Deservedly, he has 3 Pulitzers And 3 5 star ratings out of the 4 books that I have read by him.


  10. says:

    .


Leave a Reply

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