1930s the british failed repeatedly to reconcile competing arab and jewish demands. Was the british mandate destined to fail . Before i answer that if i could just thank the Wilson Center rob, for this event. And state unequivocally that it wasnt for the Wilson Center this book would not be possible. It took this long to write that i was to prop twice as a filter it was extremely generous of the september so want to thank the previous president , lee hamilton, current president Jane Harman Janet and the library. This is a huge treasure thats here. The wisdom of the United States congress which is not something we are of often integrating the Wilson Center and making it is enormous resource for scholars but also a resource to discuss i think cuttingedge policy issues. And, finally, let me thank my old friend rob, not just for friendship and support in particular with this book over the years, but really a very under the weather and extremely kindly refused to hand the baton to someone else to check this and said he was coming to do this. I really appreciate that rob. Now that you question which probably the anticlimatic. I dont think the mandate was necessarily due to failure. Let me provide some context. One of the problems is britain of course they conflicting promises to the arabs and jews in palestine and the correspondent in 1914, 1950. They pledged if the arabs fought alongside britain against germany and the ottomans that certain territories would be granted their freedom and, of course, exactly one month before general allenby conquered jerusalem, and issued the Balfour Declaration pledging itself to facilitate the establishment in palestine of a Jewish National home. Sexually the league of nations predecessor to that of nations cup awarded britain a mandate in charge britain was preparing palestine for eventual independence. I think no one looks at what is a very melancholy 30 year history of british rule in palestine. The british undermined themselves of at least the prevailing sentiment that brought both arab and jews in palestine that british policy could be persuaded or forced to adjust to acts of violence almost immediately after the beginning of the zionist enterprise followed world war i that is when britain permitted larger numbers of jewish immigrants to come to palestine, this precipitated a series of very serious lies. The british responded by somewhat redefining its policy the Balfour Declaration, lebanon jewish immigration and adopting a policy of palestine making immigration, future immigration depend upon palestine economic absorptive capacity. Unfortunate that sent the message to both communities in palestine that violence paid. This occurred in 1912 after the masseuse rights convulsed the country and the British Government really attempted to claw back the Balfour Declaration to zionist pressure reversed that but the writing was on the wall. In 1936193rd and when the arab rebellion took place on the eve of world war ii in 1939 britain took enormous a significant step of completely redefined its policy of proposals and the if you read the webpage which impose severe limitations on jewish immigration a future jewish immigration depend upon their consent and opposed drastic restrictions on jewish land purchase. The documents adult life. In the archives one of the jewish militants underground organizations that use terror tactics. They discussed this among themselves and declared a revolt. Shortlived as world war ii or got about four months later. Much greater menace to generate coming from nazi germany. But they are quite explicit if the interviews violence and ap. Its time for the jews now to violate her i think that was a problem but even at the end of the mandate you the most senior british officials both in palestine and in london in documents that i examined saying that the Paul Damphousse is that everybody believes that violence works and can persuade us to change our policy. By that it was too late. The right about historical figures who loom large in the prehistory of israel. Abraham stern, Menachem BeginWinston Churchill ill husseini, and others. Can you paint a brief portrait of these men and their roles in the events depicted in the book for . Sure. Abraham stern was obviously the founder and leader of what eventually became known to jews in palestine by the Freedom Fighters for israel no to the british as the stern gang. To me hes a particularly interesting character but he almost defies easy description. He was a poet and a visionary, a dandy and a womanizer, a dreamer and an extremist. He was very accomplished classicist. Was a pupil of the first president of Hebrew University in believe very strongly in establishing a binational arab and jewish state in israel but stern took a very different path. He believed that not only should there be a jewish state in what was then palestine but he believed there should be a resurrection of the jewish kingdom of sorts. It was determined to emulate the example of the irish during world war i during the easter uprising, seize on the opportunity of britain preoccupied world war i to make this very bold stab at attempting to wrest from the british island independent and he followed very much that example. The stern gang never numbered more than a few hundred people. Except for one particular incident come the assassination of the british minister of state for the middle east, a close personal friend of churchill one of his oldest political allies, was an official with cabinet standing. That assassination did i think have a very divisive decisive impact on the course of history. Because they lacked arms money stern had a number of mad schemes, that was the least less effective arm of the jewish revolt in the 1940s. Menachem begin, ma on the other hand, i think was very different. He had been born in 1913 in sort of a backwater confluence of poland with lil wayne you and russia to give grown up in a time and environment of antisemitism, one of his oldest memories was his father defending a rabbi with a very long beard that the polish soldier was attempting to cut off with a bayonet. As his father used his Walking Stick to strike the polish soldier which, of course would result in his arrest and his own merciless beating. Cassette huge impact on Menachem Begin from a very young age. He was somewhat Digital Divide unique oratorical powers, very learned, eventually obtained a law degree at the age of 15. He heard the founder of zionism, the new Zionist Organization that advocates a very muscular aggressive form of zionism was completely taken with them. Rose through the ranks of the Youth Movement associate with his party. Eventually becoming head of the Organization Important that i think significantly for his subs with covered heads of this propaganda unit. 1930s unit was not quite the notorious word as it is today. And 93 when he was arrested by the Russian Secret Police and was on a boat to siberia, imprisonment when hitler invaded russia and he like other polish jews was given the choice to continue their journey or in listing in the polish army in exile. Not surprisingly he chose the latter. And then found himself in palestine. In 1943 he arrived in palestine. He left the polish army because of his prominence in europe before the war assumes a leading role and really emerged as this master strategist. I think his understanding of what we would call today Information Operations psychological operations really distinguish this invisible our good book that is the first postmodern or postworld war ii campaign of National Liberation that consciously used spectacular, dramatic acts of violence the liberty played in the international media. And not just to play to a local audience which had been a feature of terrorism and guerrilla wars in the past but played to an international audience. Directed his message to london and jerusalem to new york to washington, d. C. , to paris to london. The aboveground political workstation so they were extreme active in the United States, including putting on a hit broadway play called a flag is born, on raising money. To stage many of the aboveground political organizations that did a funnel money and funds to tears and other underground organizations. So it was an effective i think and era before 20 for some satellite News Coverage in harnessing the power of the media to communicate his message beyond palestine and use that pressure for the british. Winston churchill, he is a lifelong zionist, always styled himself as one of the jews closest friends. Where he figures prominently in the book is that in 1943 he embarked on a very daring plan to reverse the white paper and to partition palestine into separate jewish and arab states. Uncountable as it is for some people, and the british archives its in the papers. Literally on the eve of the u. S. President ial election in november 1944, churchill had proposed the next big three meeting be in jerusalem, not in tehran where it is plain to partition palestine wouldve been discussed and then two days after the u. S. President ial election is when the stern gang shot to death lord moyne churchills oldest friend and member of the british cabinet. And churchill never really, his support for zionism remain but the partition plan, it would have been difficult to get through British Parliament but nonetheless he turned his back on the partition plan and it was a lost opportunity. Finally, husseini the jerusalem, he styled himself the grand, that was his title to interesting individual from one of the most prominent palestinian arab families. Yassir arafat is one of his descendents. Studied at the prestigious seat of learning in cairo. A student their organize clubs and demonstrations against jewish immigration to palestine. He was one of the architects of the 1920 rights against jews and was sentenced to 15 years in prison but he was pardoned and then a colossal misstep on the part of the british, they thought that by giving him a very Senior Office that this would moderate his views. He was made president of the council. It did not moderate his views. In fact, by the end of the 1920s he had achieved this very close fusion of religion with nationalism that transformed the situation in palestine that precipitated the 1929 riots. He was behind the 1936 arab rebounds and. Fled palestine. Spent part of world war ii in rome in been in berlin. He was very active in recruiting Bosnian Muslims to serve in the ss. One thing up front and the u. S. Archives that did make it into the book is that interestingly he was paid by the nazis as much as field marshal rumble, hitlers favorite joke to he was paid an enormous amount of money, so he is a very nefarious character. In the preface to anonymous soldiers, you raise the fundamental question, does terrorism work . Based on the lessons from the campaign should research, what are the circumstances and factors that enable some terrorist campaigns to succeed and others to fail . This is one of the third rails in anonymous soldiers. The first is really a reason to question whether terrorism is a more effective strategy than many claim that it is. Secondly calling them terrorists. Two things. Firstly i think history itself is rarely monarch also. One can argue very narrowly, im a terrorism specialist from a terrorism perspective you can say that terrorism caused world war i. Thatstudents of history know its more complex than that. There was the anglo german naval rivalry for example, russias entry list aims in the balkans are really ready to continue rule rather more tenuous. Everything is much more complex. Im not making the argument that terrorism or Menachem Begin were the only ones that resulted in a series of events that led to the founding of israel. Certainly far more important fact, the holocaust of course is an enormous one. The displaced persons that two or three years after world war ii were languishing in camps throughout your. Too far more moderates legitimate Zionist Organization engaged in diplomacy and their own information operation. But this does raise the problem the raise the problem of things for discussing and researching terrorism becomes uncomfortable because no one wants to admit they had any role. That was part of the purpose of this book was to eliminate under what circumstances and what makes terrorism effective. A lot of it has to do with response and a lot of the problems that the bridge encountered in palestine. Lets face it. Allison was an enormously militarized country at the end of world war ii. They are 100,000 british troops and police. They were basically 20 british soldiers for every male jew in palestine. We think of some of the force ratios the United States forces had been iraq and in afghanistan, a tremendous advantage. But where i think they can Menachem Begin strategy, turning gaza into a glass house where it was always a page news and weather during a dramatic acts of violence did focus attention on britain focus attention on large British Culture presents with a more pervasive Security Forces were the stronger the terrorists appear to be. But also with the image of palestine as occupied territory of depression of the jewish people was often reported throughout the world. And i think some of those lessons, the internationalization of the conflict, the appeal to audiences far beyond the front like a duchess in the capital of the country that may be governing war and occupation i. T. International capitols appeals the United Nations attempts to involve the United States. Just the publicity inherited and carefully workers to the liberal deliberate acts of violence fortunately we have seen recur throughout the decades. In terms let me address headon the terrorism issue. I think one of the challenges in writing history is to do the past in its own terms and to view it as hard as possible and to avoid bringing contemporary values. Thats not they cant render contemporary judgments but at the time i think fascinatingly governments and the media have far less hesitation labeling these acts of violence terrorism and the putative. A couple of weeks ago there was an attack in pakistan on a school but let us on the major newspapers throughout the world. Their coverage of the incident, the word terrorism didnt appear. The bbc has a policy gets using that word. 60 years ago that wasnt the case to the jewish king of its socalled the actions terrorism. So not making a value judgment. Well, violence played a major role in the ethical in a struggle that paved the way for the Foundation Official put it was not the only tactic. Can you tell us what other methods were used and where terrorism fits in . One interesting thing again thats often ignored is this is that were not going to touch terrorism or study terrorism, is that they in fact have an aboveground political apparatus operating in the United States from letter lead before world war ii that used to run support the congress, that he used to fundraise and so on. That was one but so is our number of the Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency which, of course, was the main elected george represented organization in palestine the the world Zionist Organization. All of these entities were more active and effect of these played similar role immigration official. Im not trying to tell the inuit out of the way. I did want to really clinically assess the conditions were Political Violence fight late april but in that sense i think were they did play a role is certainly hastening the process, making it less tenable for britain to remain in control of palestine. Its interesting, this is a very fat book at the first six chapters cover from 19701939. The next six chapters cover world war ii from 19391945. The final 10 chapters cover, final nine, 19451947 because i wanted i really want is her into what british officials were saying in palestine and, of course what british most senior british policy decisionmakers were debating and discussing in london. There you find again i think it cuts against the conventional wisdom that many people bridle with this but looking at the documents. Amazingly even the britain had granted independence still wanted to retain houston because of its strategic value. The British Mediterranean interest. They were in the process of completing negotiations with egypt for the anglo egyptian treaty of may 46 so britain knew it had to leave the suez canal. They looked at the british declared over joint chiefs of staff, imperial chiefs of staff repeatedly and i can think of no matter what, we have to retain basing rights in the future palestine. Even today you can see a huge storage facility. Back in the 1940s that was the terminus of the Iraq Petroleum pipeline. A network of pipelines for mosul deposit their oil. So britain wanted to retain going to retain allison but its only really in favor 1947 where i would argue where think the documents show clearly that the christ despite prices that just enjoy. Britain was on the verge of bankruptcy from fighting world war ii. Theres this immense pressure to reduce British Defense expenditures in 1947. There was a significant large number of british soldiers serving in the army that had been conscripted for january 11944. Thats when you see because of the pressure of violence where britain has decided we cant maintain this large military presence anymore. The person who wrote the checks, the head of the treasury, he said we cant afford, basing these issues may be important to have a base on a wasps nest. Theres a review coming out from the New York Times and this is that the wasp nest no, if you read the quote exactly in the cabinet minutes, the wasp nest is on but are the two jewish organizations and the threat that they pose. Steadfastly. The bombing of the King David Hotel in 9046 remains one of the most infamous terrorist attacks in history. Can use when the controversy and discussed what anonymous soldiers concludes really happened in . This i think is one of the most important chapters of the book and one of them where i found the amount of new archival data. First and foremost it has to be said that despite its portrayal these is in immediate, king david of course is a Luxurious Hotel at the time, one of the most luxurious in the world but it wasnt just the hotel. This was not as we see terrorism today the wanted inflection of violence on random civilian targets. In fact, seven stories of the King David Hotel had been taken over by the British Government to the secretary was located there. British army headquarters. The office of British Military intelligence were located there. As were the offices of British Security services and my five and the secret Intelligence Service mi6. So from their point of view this is a legitimate military target only a small part of the hotel was still open to the public but that, of course, was a fatal flaw. In the desire to preserve the veneer of normality, the hotel wasnt closed down completely. Theres a lot of archival evidence of very Senior Intelligence officials is in palestine and saying this is a disaster waiting to happen. Much like in the world there were plenty of intelligence warnings that it planned to attack the king david for those reasons but actual intelligence often established specific dates and times and that was what was missing to think it was a fatally false sense of security and the still open to the public. The hotel was bombed. To this day it remains i think intimacy one of those terrorist federal and the largest number of casualties in the 20th century, 91 were killed, arabs jews and breaks as well. As result of that tragedy theres often the controversy about firstly whether the the issued a warning to evacuate the hotel and secondly whether the warning was communicated insufficient time to allow the evacuation. Through a variety of documents including sources that have only been released into jews of trying to put together a very detailed chronology i think much like wars are easy to start, theyre difficult to control. Terrorist operations are easy, its not so easy but the conception of how often does it follow that execution. To make a long story short the effort to plant the bomb the planting of the bomb didnt go according to plan. Running down battle broke out but the point is warnings were issued i think thats very clear. The problem is that generous amounts of time that is often being maintained is in greater doubt and it seems that at least when i was a will to determine insufficient time was about to be back with the building but even apart from that the warnings went to the hotel switchboard. They were never communicate it to the british officers or the british officials. This is extremely important because this is why the wilson said such great place to work because a book that was published in 1948 called the rape of palestine alleged the number two most senior british official in palestine, sir john shah, when you heard about the warning allegedly said im not sure to take orders from jews. Im here to give them orders. Lead anyone to study this area there were plenty of britains that had that attitude and were opposed to zionism. John shah was not one of them. Interesting i think like in most lies there and polished over time and eventually the star becomes not only did he say im not here to take orders from jews and refuse the warning but on one account he pulled a pistol and threatened to shoot anyone in his office who left. In another occasion hezbollah didnt transfer the warning to anyone else but he ordered his soldiers with managed to surround the hotel. I was able to piece together exactly how the story became more and more embellished. And i think at the end of the day even though there wasnt attention perhaps the issued a warning, i dont think that solves nothing big in and others from the sponsor of the 91 lives that were killed. They still were killed and this is i think the controversy is why the students i think such a contentious issue even today. One thing i did find that if it was hitherto would never be published which i thought was fascinating but gets into an inside baseball when you write for four and half years. It was a very effective deception plan to ensure that the head of British Police intelligence and the local mi5 station chief, so the Domestic Intelligence chief, to make sure that both out a palace on the day of the bombing. They were both in beirut supposedly chasing up a plot there. I thought this is one of those moments when youre working in an archives and you go holy cow this is amazing. Theres a document signed by a cold war spy who passed the information that it was this plot in beirut. A soviet spy had to have his nose in everything and thats why hes poking around in palestine. I have to sit to usually went back to the british archives to look at that document again the region was gone and it was a photocopy in its place just to make sure no one tampered with it or stole it. Faceting. Think youve given us a sense of this magisterial mainstream and findings that youre able to call from the archives in many years of sustained and deep research into these questions. Lets open it up now for questions from the floor. There are microphones that will be circulated. Lets begin with professor. Hang on for a second. First saw congratulations. I havent read it yet but i think is a very important. I was there a good part of the years you discussed. [inaudible] is the microphone on actually . Is there a button underneath . I couldnt find the button earlier. Okay. So let me say one more time. What i want, i want three sentences, add something to the story. Without anyway taking away from i think what you did very well. We need to understand is that any society at the time was constructed in exactly the opposite way all western societies are . The western societies are basically capitalistic and they allow for little slowly for the movement to edge in. The History Society was built by the other way around. The majority of institutions were labor, and capitalism was marginal. The major fighting force was from the left. One exception, and it was a minority or decision. So first of all in terms of number of troops and influences all an additional star. But it is important to your thesis is because as you pointed out so well what part of the site was Public Opinion . One of the reasons the british show back was that they left majority force chose to focus on pr rather than violence. That put the british in an awkward position because unlike the french, machine gun people, they did not want to get to a shooting fight with the left majority. So for instance, when they blew up the railroad station, first of all there was this the drama of the jewish refugees escaping post nazi europe and the bridge tried stopping at the that didnt add to the pr. It the equivalent of the dogs in selma. And all those cases the british were warned to leave and left. A good part of the success, so the question remains, how much weight you give to terror and how much weight do you give to the other methods . Thats a very important question. Obviously, with the first in experience you know the nuances of the struggle. This is not just a book about that. I would say that certainly your point is absolutely right. If you ask want to the british for the most they thought the stern gang were fanatics and they were scared of them but they knew the numbers. They engaged mostly in political assassinations. They never numbered more than 5000 persons, and that includes support. What they always were developed was a group that numbered 4060,000 members but then they realized it both the Paramilitary Forces decided to actively participate in a result that holding onto palestine would be untenable. As you know there was a brief period after world war ii when they allied together and engaged in attacks against british targets, as you pointed out the radar stations along the coast that intercepted ships bringing illegal under current. Of course, in june 1946, theres that famous night of the bridges. A photograph in the book where they blow up the bridges linking palestine with lebanon and syria and jordan. I think the key and with the important nuance shift in the book is that following the King David Hotel thats another thing i couldnt get into because there was a role in selecting targets. A more complicated story, but after i think the carnage at the king david and what orozco this alliance fell apart completely. Generally speaking after night 46, they concentrate almost exclusively as you describe on Information Operations and also on illegal immigration. They no longer attacked the british. That is what the importance of the services and keeping a much smaller force, possibly keeping the pressure on the british and making world untenable in a sense that there was this large garrison there was always guard against a revolt. Again, im not trying to finesse this. Im not trying in the book is a privilege when i say one was more important than the other but against someone who has spent his entire career studying the effects of terrorism and Political Violence on government decisionmaking and trying to better understand the countermeasures that can be used to defeat terrorism. That was my interest and why i thought the story at least in English Literature is pretty much neglected to in the hebrew literature its contentious and controversial, because as you describe, the new Zionist Organization, the revisionist party, opposition to the labor zionist with precisely this issue of socialism versus capitalism. I think it is so woven into the fabric of the israeli polity today. In english language the debate the nuances are less wellknown. Another question right there. Could you please identify yourself . Tom parker, George Washington university. Bruce, can you comment on the views about the violent tactics . And then maybe make a distinction between the military targets which are not terrorism per se you know typical definition and the nonmilitary targets. First, it was part of it and wouldve been under the political guidance. They were the shock troops innocents. The elite force. Very different from the others which were politically more associated with revisionists zionism. Bengurion and Menachem Begin i think were lifelong enemies. Both of the time that there was this tremendous personal antipathy, and certain afterwards i think, as Menachem Begin became leader of the opposition transformation from leading the freedom party. Theyre always had an antagonistic relationship. And bengurion himself disdained and strenuously objected to the fact is that they use. This was covered in the book 19441945, order to members to out down members and to present important over to the british authorities. So bengurion did have this the nonviolence, lets say the very controlled and prudent use of force i was as opposed to violence. Both be saved that there was no time for talk. David bengurion placed his faith in negotiation. Humanitarian pressure, in lobbying, Information Operations. The others thought the time for action was not to the time for action at the end of world war i because the british had closed the case of palestine and jews were in a terrible times in europe. I think their inpatient this will put pressure and hazelwood have been im not saying the decision to great is your was because they blew up the King David Hotel. Likely is she would have unfolded in a certain way that might have been unaffected by the actions of them. But the key is i think they hastened the process enormously and deprived britain of all the options they wanted, not least the rights, britain wouldve preferred not a jewish state. That i think is where the key lies. As we see often today with above ground Political Parties and their relationships with militant groups is they can often, even though the nonviolent entities condemned the violence, nonetheless of on the parties can also play into the process that facilitates the overall political aims. Is there difference between these groups on the question of means and use of tear that you just described . If they differ on whether to accept partition . Well, stern had visions of creating israel. That was spread all over the middle east and, in fact, both groups when you look at their statements and the propaganda statements, they believed they could work in partnership with the arabs. They are argued it was the british have betrayed both sides, that the british were untrustworthy because they had an imperialist colonial interest in palestine. The logo was, as you might expect, a militant organization was a fist clutching a rifle. The map behind was not just a map of what is today is a but enough of all sides of the jordan river, to include jordan as well as social. But nontheless, that was the overall over at the end of the day when presented with the opportunity to partition i think begin was smart enough strategist the politician that he embraced it. I think many will be interest in well as the title of the book, anonymous soldiers. So tell the audience sure. Trend in is the title of a poem that stern wrote when he was then a member and Senior Commander and that became the theme song, such as was there but we left when they declared a truce and the outbreak of world war ii, said that it would suspend it should vote against britain to suspend all operations, he thought, can hardly back to the irish example, now it is the time to ratchet up terrorism and violence. So anonymous soldiers to be translated as also unknown soldiers but they anonymous soldiers refers to really the fighters. I use as a title of the book referred to all the parties have engaged in the fighting in palestine at that time. Lets take a question from this gentleman here. My name is stephen shore. Any new information about son back. You know my lack of wisdom impacted a topic like terrorism, ive already displayed. Perhaps my one wise move once i stop action in september 1947 because thats when britain announced that they could not resolve the political future of palestine and turn it over to the United Nations to decide. That was what i was interested in, is how terrorism affected rish policy and decisionmaking. I dont get into that which, of course, i could more than a year later in the midst of the first arabisraeli war. The gentleman on this site. Thank you for what you did. As an italian i want to add identify yourself, please spent sorry. [inaudible] that mussolini was the first one to give money to help husseini and not hitler. Mussolini wanted to get rid of the british helping the jews. And what is interesting. [inaudible] that they were helping the jews with exactly the same aim. And the jews destroyed the British Embassy in rome which is also interesting. We gave them a lot from the resistance after the second would war, to the jews helping them in any way as we did with the nigerians against the french. Thank you. Those are all very astute points and extreme accurate ones as well. Certainly the influence over the palestine arabs in the 1930s especially for italy and germany and one in come and britain was enormous import you are absolutely right. Just to make the story is a more compensated, stern study classics in rome. There he action was very impressed with mussolini in fact. Also receive money from the Italian Government during world war ii to undermine the british. To show you how desperate stern was to really to foment this revolt against the british he also sent emissaries to try to get some sort of alliance with the germans as well. Thats another part of this. This was before the conference. He saw associate attorney could rid itself of its jewish problem by sending them all to palestine. Throw the british out and go be an end of rish imperialism in the mediterranean and italy and germany could be dominant. And, of course youre absolutely right because keeping the rome in this incident for my best pocket because look Menachem Begin in 1951 wrote a book the revolt which is his account of its a great book. I think its one of the classics of wars of liberation, of underground warfare, after his campaign, whatever you want to call it. Offices of local municipal offices we call that terrorism. They attacked the jerusalem rail station for example one demand of the madrid bombings, we recall terrorism, and i mean this was the other interests, one of the more interesting titles of the chapter of my book is called beating the dog in the kennel and that was a quote from an intelligence performance at the british had said the plan in 1946 because the british were not leaving palestine fast enough was to bring the struggle both to europe and britain in both places its never quite materialized. A lot of the security and scrutiny that we see in the borders today the british were doing 60 years ago and Christopher Andrews has written about this and they were pretty successful. There was a bombing at the Colonial Office in 1947 and various plots became the defense minister in israel to engage in the assassination of a senior british officials. He was the moderate leading zionist president of israel and of mmike other terrorists in the 1940s who actually found themselves because he was from a distinguished family and his uncle was the president of the organization into the british detective knocked on his door in london but only a stupid that suggested he returned to palestine but he packed up and left and thats why he wasnt arrested that you are but you are absolutely right to point that out. And from the American University and so for the first few decades after the establishment marginalized in terms of foundation that was meant that was taught they tell a story of how her father was a senior chief of operations and her parents met while robbing a british train and she says no terrorists but when she was in Elementary School her teacher was talking all about how she stood up and said what about data that trend there is no marginalization obviously the labour party was in power for a long time in the 77 as it . There are still portions obviously. You are right and he was the Senior Officer and during the escape they engineered in 1947. Earlier i said it was acceptable and now of course terrorism is too and it is a much more derivative connotation. I may be one of the few people in the world. I delete could you describe the phenomena as it is and look at the act not so much of the perpetrator. Im not making a value judgment. The practice back then although it was tragic but a completely different character magnitude of today so one of the things that i despair having spent nearly 40 years is that the phenomena despite many others gets worse, not better and it is an example but it doesnt mean. Its again as it was called back then so in and of itself it is used infrequently now and many streets when you visit israel but of course you dont want it both in and take your National History into the narrative that terrorism was involved because it is a negative term. Second if terrorism perhaps exceeds that only encourages others and palestinians for instance they were quite exclusive about this they model what they did. They said we have this example are. So you dont want to discuss postthings and i think that lasts today and also the political divisions that the professor and i were talking about earlier still go back to the time that using the word terrorism becomes yet another loaded phrase. The one thing that isnt in the book what was fascinating was that in september, 1948 he was an assassinated Council Swedish national who was the mediator because they feared that the plan was going to the un was behind would not favor israel. Its fascinating. This hasnt happened often in history sense. He was the new Prime Ministers of israel. He immediately outlawed in order to the arrest of all of the members and seized 248 members that were not brought to trial. He became the Prime Minister of israel and he couldnt return until 1956 because of that arrest and basically the law that the new israeli state and braced or acted against jewish terrorists because in the 1930s against the 1940s they still are used against the palestinians today. Going about houses for example is something and this was part of the strength of the Information Operations. They played to the audiences in paris, moscow, london, new york and washington in the 1930s they didnt quite yet have their terrorism and rebellion and it didnt have the same Information Operations but its fascinating. The same law that is used today were first promulgated in 1948 against the jewish terrorism and these people were sent for another eight years or so. As you pointed out on the palestinian side the terrorist leader who was kind of a counterpart in the palestinian side of how his legacy still has residence in the contemporary narrative. If they could be very happy and uplifting but even given my pessimism about the world, i found in the book it is depressing because all of the things we see today happened in palestine back then. Just last week we had a conference in washington to talk about Economic Opportunities and jobs and education. They left the overall economy to benefit everyone but at the end of the day as the fall in the riots that come. Fullstop palestine almost immediately following the first generation accretion under the british rule is that nationalism and religion always trumped an economic benefit and that is one thing that i thought was fascinated. They are mired in the great depression. Palestines economy was booming archly because the British Investment you look at some of the architecture in jerusalem today. They were thriving economically while the world was in depression and get of course it didnt matter. Similarly that was a devout muslim to have this fusion of both politics and resistance and much like bin laden and his 50s he went to it to prosecute the struggle was divinely ordained. Unlike bin laden he didnt avoid being tracked over a decade they tracked him down with a couple of months and that was the end of the revolt, but it was his followers that precipitated and of course he himself is enshrined in the charter and the missiles that played a role in precipitating. We could go on but our time is up unfortunately. The book landmark study the copies are available for purchase outside the seminar room and i would like to thank all of you for coming today. As a nastyit is a nasty day in washington. I say that since my sister lives in boston. [laughter] so you i would like to thank all of you for attending today and those on cspan book tv. For those here please join me. [applause] when you are a soldier you take your orders and serve. You do your duty. But now as a citizen i want to use what ive seen and learned to speak out in defense of liberty and freedom given to us by god and defended by the government and the military. I refuse to be part of a generation that went abroad to defeat the evils of terrorism to come home to see washington lose the fight through the misguided security and foreign policies. I cannot remain silent as the leaders fail to speak openly and truthfully about the spreading cancer of islamic extremism. I will not simply sit back and watch as we turn our backs on our allies and a piece those who are not our friends. Too much of our foreign and your foreign and National Security policies in recent years have been made for the desire to produce shortterm Political Goals to gain the political territory and informed by the unrealistic view of the world. Wishing the world to be something other than it is does nothing for American Security or american interest. We can all learn a lot about Foreign Policy and Crisis Management and International Relations from academics but you can also learn quite a bit from one real world experience and investing judas changing seemingly chaotic world we that we live i would argue that we need more folks in the positions of leadership that has experience in a more dangerous and sensitive regions of the globe. In making National Security decisions, local culture matters. Next on booktv, after words. Correspondent and marine infantry officer david morris sits down with iraq war veteran and iran corporation kkilo williams. The two talk about the history of post Traumatic Stress disorder and the 27 million americans including david morris himself who currently suffer from ptsd. Shes also the author of plenty of time whe