..

>> and especially our partners at suffolk university that acts as home base and also the boston beer company the makers of sam adams. i don't know why that always gets a laugh. they are a great company. do you think we will give you some fried year on the way out? and now time for the show. that principle of calenture consulting and her experience include sadek disservice -- a decade of service including politics

at the j.f. school of government university and howard affects policy may gain with martin and david and lindsay she received her degree from tufts university and a proud member of the board treasurer. please welcome when the balance your. [applause] >> it is the privilege to be here for a fascinating evening. i am privileged to introduce gilad sharon the son and biographer of israeli prime minister. what is best known of controversial figures of the middle east, gilad sharon has just produced a biography the life of a leader. the youngest son of aerial jerome three sons and has been a constant in his life and he holds a master's

three economics and a frequent columnist for an israel the newspaper. he currently manages his family's fund . >>

>> what did is really interesting is is combining their young states of the life of israel so we are combined in the history of the country with good thing about the road map is moving from one stage to the next 14 fulfilling obligations of the previous day's. unfortunately with the obligations, and they never fought jihad britney other organization. nothing came out of it. and when he was prime minister he was willing to keep the first age to deal directly with the other issues. so we are in square one.

my father was no doubt a legendary leader he led the ad head to great victories. we knew where he was headed and when you have a target it doesn't matter and the values that he always believed to ensure the lives of the jews from all over the world we came through russia in the nineties it was a blessing and developing the country this is what he tries to achieve.

this been a kid is my privilege to begin a conversation with mr. sharon after i have a chance to ask the questions we will open your questions. as i told you before i will ask questions of roughly chronological order is for the life of burial shroud to talk about the major points. you describe your father's early years some involved trickery but all a great deal of bravery. any moments in which he was particularly proud in his partitioned -- participation of birth of a nation? >> guest: good evening. i am excited to be here thank you for coming.

i'm sorry will you repeat the question? [laughter] >> host: as the country was born, your father was a key part of military operations a you describe his personal bravery. looking at it from this perspective, the things that he was particularly proud of the things he may have regretted? >> my father could have been a farmer he could be a writer with is a midget -- imagination or his abilities may be going in and other direction again and again actually this was not his first choice. he never thought of himself in the early years as someone to have a military career the first love was

farming with the endless arms to driving a my father had a very hard time even when they would not elect him any more so it is open with their sheep and cows that do not give birth or milk. [laughter] he would just say give another chance. soto trust me if this is not his first choice. out already as a young officer to lead the attack on to jerusalem cut off by

armed forces. the attack failed and he was badly wounded. he was left alone on the battlefield only four survived the awful day intact the rest were killed or wounded. he was left alone on the battlefield but the story of survival is no less than a miracle and i described in the book but because of that awful day, may 26, 1948, he sets the rules for the entire israeli army that is

very relevant today. he took us to the spot where he was badly wounded, crawling, he was passing that place might drive there and not thinking that awful day hot and fire around and he was alone over there. i would say this is the most remarkable event and it brought a value that is kept today. >> host: you actually covered my first to question is with that one answer.

[laughter] that is a wonderful answer. now during the six-day war in your father commanded the armored division and is he sent troops into motion can you talk about his role of the six-day war how he looks back out of that in the later years? >> it is very interesting because after the 67 war, suddenly the terror attack that we suffered during the 1950's and '60's were forgotten. suddenly after the 67 more, after the west bank and the gaza strip became part of it, suddenly they

were forgotten the between the ears of 67 and 48, why didn't they established the palestinian state back then? in 1967, leading into the center of the country, it was if the rest of elimination the common phrase was the entity. that we were there for. he was a division commander in the south his was the most difficult one to break

through the main egypt's shouldn't stronghold it was a brilliant battle but i want to tell you after death a great victory of that battle the first day of the war actually open for the entire israeli army than trading in the military paid vehicle on another rhodes. on the side road he saw the egyptian in stopped the vehicle immediately and went down and sentence the israeli soldiers to prison because he said in the war you fight. that is the nature but when

a man is your prisoner you have to act like a human being. this is my father. >> host: can we talk how your father left the military the interviews that he gave and the conduct of yom kippur? eighty-one when he left the military? >> host: he gave to introduce. >> guest: 1973? i was seven years old my english now is not that good. [laughter] when i was seven years old? [laughter] >> host: talk about the yom kippur war? >> guest: he did something first act in his public career was to take five if

opposition parties to take one day party and by doing that he gave a real meaning to democracy because for the first time it was dead chance after decades of the labor party and then it begging for the government four years later. the yom kippur war was a bitter and terrible war the israeli leadership allow the country to be surprised. so they ignore the signs and allow the army to be caught by surprise. however so of my father

conducted with the embittered battle with the change in the war and at the end of the war 100 kilometers from cairo new egyptian force could stop them and that was after being caught by surprise. i would say this is one of the biggest victories that my father in the idea of the israeli army had ever. he lost good friends in that war his friend was killed next to him crossing the suez canal site we lost

about 3,000 men and that war and for us, you can see we take one and give 1,000. you can see a and our feelings. this is yom kippur more. it started says israeli trauma but it ended in a great victory. >> host: your father left the military right after that. >> i remember after he crossed the canal, he was talking to me and said i am jockeying to you. i am was not sure what was going on in. are you a prisoner of war?

[laughter] and his wife was very strong and was not a force. [laughter] he left the army before the war. >> host: and already made nearly transition to politics. >> he serve the country since the age of 17 and sell it was obvious as he was not interested in business or anything like that. it was the natural way to continue. >> host: your father was

appointed minister of agriculture but at some point* you say he saw the military and the agricultural aspects of two sides of the same:can you talk about how those two areas that seem very different that we typically don't have politicians or maybe jimmy carter there are not a lot can you see how your father saw them as though clearly intertwined for agriculture? >> november 1977 the egyptian president came and the first question he asked before he went down is --

with their shaking hands he approached my brother and said i was trying to catch you in the desert. and my father said you have a chance to catch me now. they did have very good relations. and i remember one of the visits my father visited in his palace in yen cairo and wanted to develop various mostly in the desert to grow the wheat and feed the egyptians. but asking to go to our the area my father has both sides.

and so my father found himself with the two pilots with the jet pilot only a few years before tried to kill him but they cannot. [laughter] at plying there with the egyptian jet pilot, they got the feeling of what this is about. here you tried to attack my forces and myself but now we fly around because we want to grow wheat. and of course, the conditions where much better.

israel's borders reshaped in some areas by the settlements to answer your question 1/2 to go back 21947 in november resolution 181 known as the petition resolution in. that suggested establishing two new states, the jewish one and the other one it was accepted as a solution but of the palestinian in one could accept the solution than they would have a palestinian state today. they could have 63 year old state buydown but they rejected it. they went to war join to buy

the army's to eliminate them. not a single palestinian refugee. but they chose differently unfortunately. one of their arguments today going to the u.n. is the resolution. where have you been all those years? the resolution was based on the one before of 1937 with the division of the country and one of the criteria is who lives where? so those that were held,

city in the communities could in the cease-fire of 1949 was part of israel but we did not have a supplement there. so they managed to boost us from the area but you have to defend them and it was the connection i am sorry about that. >> host: a perfect segue into my next question. he was also chairman of the ministry committee and embraced the growing movement but over time his views appeared to change if we watch history. can you talk about his early thoughts how he viewed the settlements? >> the settlements were

chosen in order to insure the major three problems that we had. 10-mile wide country less than the usual farm in texas. the whole size of the country is less than new jersey. it is tiny. some of the reach above the coast line above the international airport and major 80% of the population and the infrastructure facilities all concentrated in the coastline this was

the first and a jerusalem was a united city to prevent the possibility but it would become a city and the third is what we've referred to the eastern front and not a scenario not fictional because israel would be attacked from the east that happen the 1967 and 1973. so to protect israel from being attacked those forces coming from jordan, the iraqi forces went to syria

and in the previous wars we don't have any dispute but they joined the iraqi forces and jordanians and the syrians, sewed to defend israel from the east, but let me surprise you. my father was talking about palestinians, edie militarize but talked about that already in the late 1970's. he knew that not all settlements would stay. he was brought from gaza but there are areas you have to keep forever because otherwise the israeli

security is in danger. that is how he saw it. >> host: his opinions did not change over time in terms of the settlements or devolve from somebody who wanted to expand the settlements into some when he was willing to give back some of the land? that has been the common wisdom. >> the gaza strip this one thing and the area that he saw that was critical for our security should be left in our hands forever. the palestinians and gaza could have them -- could have a call. -- have it all but instead we got rockets and a tax and

sometimes in the form we live 4 miles the children are often being fired at. regarding the west bank there are areas that should be in our hands forever because we cannot put our security and to anyone else hands and that was proven time after time. inc any changes here. if he thought the place this eventually? yes. definitely. >> host: move being

further forward can you talk about the visit of your father to the temple mount in 2000. >> guest: it was not my father first visit to the temple. it is a free country. anybody can go. [laughter] >> host: he was not aware it would cause controversy? >> guest: with these negotiations with the palestinians he was willing with in in jerusalem are knesset or the public. so my eighth father was protesting against those concessions. after a few months win the election came, my father beat almost two /1 and the

israelis did not approve of the concessions. >> host: you mentioned in the mitchell report by did your father expect the lourdes drama that it caused? but it created a great deal of international drama. >> guest: he did not see that. let me ask you a question. in the area between what is the connection between psat and exploding buses? what is the connection? >> host: i am not suggesting there is one but it is a grand gesture meant

to cause some type of the fact. my interest was after birds. >> guest: it was not the first time at the temple. is the place of two temples. slowed to go to bet temple mount hundreds of years the first time the first time muslims christians and jews are allowed to grow up to pray but for all of the holy places in jerusalem. before 1967, jews could not go there. >> host: you said earlier father believe to know soldier should be left behind. i'd like you to talk about

how do think your father would have felt about bet deal struck last week? 5190 even in the red cross. it is not in marvell are human you can see what it looks like there is a difference. we do not leave our men behind it. >> host: you think your father would have to -- approved? >> i don't know what we could have done or another option. i am not suggesting this is the only option but those that bereday sergeant three

being the jordanians in the army and imprisoned in jordan. my afp father was part commander at that time. and so was i described in the book, for the jordanian soldiers, but sometimes, when you have a prisoner held by a country, you know, what is going on, but when the organization holds 45 and 1/2 years or five years and four months come nobody knows what is going on in.

you should do anything that you can cut i have a few interesting comments from arab countries to say i wish my country would take care of me. i wish my country would care about me sell much instead of shooting be in the streets. it might be seen as weakness but i don't see it that way. we care about the people. >> host: one last question from me but what do you think your hope your father's legacy will be? >> >> guest: my father was a historical leader every

political boundary but not of the israel. he had a very close relations with arab leaders i remember the egyptian president saying sharon is seal the chance for peace easily with the war on terror by remember the story of keying abdallah eight end when my father well as prime minister there were so close he wanted to give my father a president, a purebred arabian horse. my father told the keying in the prime minister's office basement we have a rule for

the presence that the prime minister gets. what do they do with of course, out there? who will feed itself course? [laughter] the jordanians dropped the subject for a while the horse in the stables of '03 word clothes from good diplomatic incident why was my father refusing to get his present? but at the end the horse was left in making stables but sometimes they ask me is that they keying source? my horse is a beautiful

course -- source but not a gift from the king. [laughter] and not only in our area of prime minister blair while i was doing my research for the book march 2010 he told me i have a huge respect for your father's the losses courageous and a visionary leader and when i was invited to the oval office president bush he said i admire your dad. i think this is how he will always be remembered. >> host: thank you very much. it is time for questions from the rest of view. i would ask keep your questions agreed you are entitled to express your opinions what we want to give as many people a chance.

if they start to go on too long i will ask you to wrap up. >> as you were speaking of humanitarian issues, had retake it the palestine does not but yet you give them a curfew and you recognize genocide happening by the israeli troops? >> saying that palestinians do not have troops i would say most of the terror attacks during the year my eighth father was prime minister were committed by the palestinian authority for sales, the guard, in so i would say the problem it of the forces instead of fighting terror of were committed being terror. >> you did not answer my

question about the curfew in palestine. >> guest: curfew? >> host: the times by which people have to be in their home and i did not on an the street in the evening >> guest: i don't think you have kids but if you would have i guess you would feel bad if your kids' school is fired upon or my kid's school bus, the yellow wind if somebody took the and this old knowing it is the yellow bus. we do everything to protect our kids. all right? and our measures i would say by far for uc and those countries. >> i'm sure your father will be remembered as the mass a

cure for the unit when no one when he was defense minister as the massacre 2002 along with another list of hanus crimes so i am curious to know is there's some sort of a traumatic experience in this man's childhood that later turned him into a brutal sociopath during his political career? call-up clap. >> guest: do i get the impression you do not like my father? senate that is reasonable to say. [laughter] >> host: if you wanted to ask a question and please come to the microphone. we are being taped everybody in this room is welcome to come down to the microphone to ask a question.

>> there was not a massacre of unfortunately when democracies like the u.s. or israel fight terror sometimes they do get hurt but the difference is the terrorists are looking for civilians intentionally. >> i suppose if anybody is in the way. >> guest: you talk so fast and my english. >> it is not your english but your morals. >> host: please slowdown it very difficult to understand police say it morris slowly and is heavily >> guest: you ask a question? a heavy crime those were christian arabs who murdered

muslim arabs this big mac the commission said he should never serve in government again. >> guest: you are wrong about the commission conclusion. they said there was not a single is really that was involved they said he should have known. and "time" magazine published an article february 1983 suggesting my father encouraged to murder the palestinians so my father immediate be decided to use to pry was with him in the first trial in new york. and the days after. both courts in the united states found it was false. inflammatory and the people

in the magazine acted carelessly. >> both investigative bodies found him responsible. >> and many other instances including his involvement through his death in 2006 when he was still expanding the some of. the european foreign commissioner reminded list again 2011 all summons under international law are completely legal so there is no excuse for any type of settlement in the territories% -- as housing minister he was expanding the settlements. >> guest: regarding the west bank why was in any palestinian it established?

let me ask another question why with the palestinian other on chapter published june 19643 peat years before the six-day war they wrote an article know which is why would they say that? because that is to excuse a our right to have a jewish state was never accepted that is their reason way we're not shown on the maps and of course, because they do not recognize our right. >> host: i will go to another question because i think we have had enough opportunity you can come back later. [applause] >> as a palestinian american

end i would thank you for coming today and my question is your father once told perez 10 years ago in october a quote i have always wondered he said everytime we do something you tell me america will do this and that i want to tell you something very clear don't worry about american pressure on israel the jewish people control america and the americans know it. what does he mean by that? >> guest: that is false. >> the israeli radio said he said that. >> guest: it is false. he would never say that because it. >> it is widely known that he said that. >> guest: i am telling you that is not right.

>> host: please come to the microphone everybody is will come to offer their views. >> shimon peres submitted he said that and he said there will be a lot of drama in the international community. >> guest: i know my father well this is not something he believed then. >> host: i suspect you have to agree to disagree. go ahead. >> i would also like to take the time to thank you for coming. you recently visited the york and you said you felt remorse for what happened at the refugee camps or the palestinians are slaughtered under the idea of control when sharon was defense minister u.s said no we did not under but how did he allow those questions to enter the camp and why did

he not stop the killings? >> guest: first, they were at christian arabs who killed muslim arabs in node jewish were involved. it was their own capital, and they wanted to free it. it was not our business inside who would rule bay ridge. they were firing at our settlements fuld thing was fired for years now for the military targets there were looking for civilians so in order to stop that to it was a terrible tragedy not the first and not the last 76

christians kill palestinians and day kinko's day kristian this earring gives the palestinians they kill each other but nobody seems to care. lourdes to see they get the israeli involve some however buddy started to care about that. >> it was the of christians but he was the defense minister said he had the power to stop them. why didn't he? >> >> host: speakers at the microphone only the. >> he did not think something like that would happen unfortunately it happened not for the first time in lebanon are the last time unfortunately 87 i wonder if it is unfair to

ask your father may think about the he could not observe him cellphone what this is the future that it will look like after democratic reforms what you think he would have sought to given his history of the countries surrounding israel? >> i am not sure b.c. democratic reforms mubarak left and freedom of speech is less than it used to be. if and his cereal we can see what is going on in. saudi arabia, which ended me -- might be able to do drive in four years and that would be a big achievement. i am not sure ravee will see

western democracy to be like the most probably more of the same or worse radically a islamic i don't know. we have to be very careful regarding who we give and what do we give. >> interesting article published this morning or negative a "new york times" which discusses condoleezza rice memoir to be released soon and discuss the plans the conversations that was had with all this regarding a potential secret settlement agreement with the israelis and palestinians and outlines

all americans put on the table and here is jerusalem that internationalized and here is what we will do or divide up the settlements roughly equivalent 94%. was at initiated by your father? would he approve for is that something based only on that position based on your father's in capacity? >> guest: he never thought of anything like that and would not approve that. >> this question is about europe's perceptions. i think in the united states, i a followed the conflict 30 years. in the united states the last two or three or four years there is a change in

terms of the american perception of the conflict and not speaking out of turn perhaps a larger percentage of americans start to feel a certain impatience with israel although we are allies but from what i sense and here is this is less patience for israel not that people think you are wrong of our right but the sense that it is the more empowered of the actors and the indications that perhaps doesn't take advantage of the things that it could to stimulate the so are peace talks you're probably familiar with j st. that has developed a response to the long time traditional

position in the united states the support for israel the overwhelming support although no more questioning i'm sorry eight my question is coming in israel is there the perception of this feeling within the united states to people talk about it? is there a widening division with israel regarding of what a kn o.r. should do to move the process? united states and then israel and what is the 10 it within the israeli people for what is going on? >> >> guest: i will give a

shorter answer. [laughter] and the first of the ties between the u.s., i believe this relationship is strong and based on mutual values of freedom and justice in three should vse radical terrorism and i think the thais are as strong as they used to be because it is the same base and regarding to what we can do, what is the second question? >> does is a real sense any sort of impatience or does israel feels the growing trend? do you know, about jay st.?

>> guest: i do not feel that. >> are you aware of j st. the lobbying group from israel? are you aware of those organizations? >> guest: i think that i heard about them but i am not sure i am fully familiar with their actions but i don't see in the decline in the relation and i am happy about it. >> the mood of israel, a division of are not division? what is the breakdown in israel itself of the peace process or lack thereof? >> guest: there is not a big difference today with the policies. the all of them agreed to establishing the palestinian state but the big question is, what are the boundaries?

and it should be demilitarized because we have suffered enough from terrorism over the years. the whole idea if this all being the problem in a peaceful way. so i do think there is a consensus of how it should be conducted i am master actually. some of them say they should start negotiations right away. for myself i believe this, if the palestinians in my opinion, they could have the palestinian state right now so what? we have prosperity.

if it is a palestinian state, take it now. if the years pass, the israelis learned to trust you and live with no terrorism and things would be easier. but if you go to the un to say we want to get everything that we demand then why bother to negotiate? if they can get it all without giving anything? i hope i answered your question in a way. >> host: i will jump back to people you may speak again but i want to go to the old woman behind it to give everybody ed chance as we work through. >> more of a comment. . .

>> hold up, hold up, you can't speak from the audience. we can't hear you. that's right, come up and get in line. and if you want to respond, come back. >> the palestinians in the israeli prisons are not allowed to be visited. >> families go there. >> lies. [laughter] no. i have friends who their fathers have been in prison since they

were born, and they cannot visit their parents in jail. >> so you think that people that are responsible for exploding buses should be out there in the streets? >> not all of the people who were, who are in jail exploded buses. >> and the ones that are responsible for that, do you think that they should in prison? >> at least they should be treated as humans. they don't get medical care in prison. >> oh, they do not? did you see how he looked when he went out and how do they look? >> he was in better shape than they did. >> oh. all right. i mean, so we disagree here. >> i'm going to go to the other side for the next question. go ahead, sir. [applause] >> thank you very much for giving me an opportunity to ask a question. >> [inaudible] >> thank you for this opportunity. i want to ask about the disengagement from gaza. obviously, this was a really hotly-debated issue in israel, and i want to ask now in retrospect now that some time

has passed do you still support your father's decision? would you take it back? i mean, was this politically advantageous for israel? what are your thoughts? >> advantageous -- >> what is the political benefit for israel, the withdrawal from gaza. >> well, there was a consensus in israel that if we would have peace agreement with the palestinians, we would not be sitting in gaza. so the question that was left was should we wait for an agreement that might never arrive, or should we do what is best for us? and he in a great leadership spirit, i mean, he took the decision and executed it. now, people say that the rockets against, that are fired toward israeli towns are the outcome of

the moving out from gaza. but the rockets started before. the first rocket -- [inaudible] near where we live were fired on april 16, 2001. but our ability to fight from gaza was limited. and so if you ask me if it was the right action, i think it was. >> thank you. >> i'm going to go here just because you will get to speak, but i want to give everybody a voice first. go ahead. >> hi. i also don't like you or your father. [laughter] >> speak louder, it's hard for us to hear you. >> a lot of people find it hilarious how the people of israel left the holocaust and created one. how do you feel about that? >> um, the israelis did not take anyone and put them in gas chambers, all right? so, i mean, show some respect. >> i'm not talking about that -- >> oh, you're not talking about

that. >> you're killing a lot of people. they ended up in dead in some way. and you keep recognizing how the people got, or your children got blown up in buses. people of palestine got hurt, too, and you don't recognize that in any way. i don't hear you saying you're upset from their side either or that you want peace. >> i'm upset with every loss of life, but let me tell you when terrorists are intentionally hide amongst civilians so when you fight them, sometimes civilians do get hurt. but terrorists are intentionally are seeking for civilians targets. and this is the difference. >> so are you saying that all the people of palestine are terrorists? >> sorry? >> are you saying all of the people of palestine are terrorists? >> oh, no. and they're not being arrested, as you know. >> yes, go ahead. >> i just want to clarify one thing for the air. i think you need to start

differentiating between terrorism and the jihad. a jihad is a struggle, so when somebody's family gets lost, and they have nothing else, they're inside a struggle, and i think this is where the, you know, the bus bombings do come, and people do commit suicide. so jihad is a struggle because something happened. they just don't call themselves a jihad out of nowhere. but to move on to my questions is, you started off by saying israel in 1948 had this 10-mile radius of a country, and they had ideas of expansion. by expansion you went in there forcefully, and it's in history that it happened forcefully. don't you think that israel was the first one to initiate force and regress the palestinians back and give them less and less and less and less and less and less and less and less and less. [applause] >> land and also freedom? that's question number one. could you, please, answer that for me?

>> i think i should refresh your memory. the palestinian rejected the partition plan on '47. if they would accepted it, the palestinian would have a palestinian state by now. the reason that they have less and less is because they never was happy with what was offered. on 1937 the commission offered them almost the whole country. the jews accepted it, the palestinians rejected it. 1947 they were offered less. jews accepted. open the war a. all the arab army came. why didn't you take it back then? why didn't you establish a palestinian state before '67? this is what your demanding right now. why didn't you do it? >> okay. can i, please, talk? so you guys were -- >> will you answer? >> i will try to give you the best answer that i know just like how you're speaking out of your best knowledge supposedly. so i think the best answer is if somebody was to try to create a

country inside the middle of the united states today and even give up one state, one minor state or city in the united states and try to call that a country, i think we would all stand here as united states, american citizens and fight for that piece of land. >> there was not a state over there. nobody had a country over there -- >> there were palestinians -- >> what are you saying? are you suggesting we had the right for a jewish state? >> i never suggested that, and that never came out of my mouth, and right now you're trying to put words in my mouth, and i never tried to put words in your mouth. i think i'm wasting time with questions, thank you very much, and a letter will be going out to suffolk along with a lot of petitions. i was happy to have you here to try to tell us some truth, but instead we got ignorance and a lot of lies, and i'm very sad about that, and that's all i have to say. [applause] >> i'm going to ask you again here, a duplicate question and

then, ma'am, i'll come to you. >> i'm not sure i have such a great question to ask you, but i'm an american jew. i've visited israel many times, i understand, you know, as a jew what gilad is trying to say which is the basic principles of all of jews are that we give. we want to give. and that i'm so sad to be here today to hear that you don't hear that we want to give as jews, as israeli jews, american jews, palestinians, we want to give you something. but recently on the news i'm reading 81 missiles are being shot out of palestine into the the me give. and we're constantly defending,

defending, defending, and it's a continuous argument. >> [inaudible] >> and what can we do, is my question, to stop the arguing and the fights back and accept that jews, that israel wants to give to you if we could have peace? and i, maybe you can comment. i don't know if it's a question or what, but, you know, i hate to see this beautiful presentation disturbed, you know, by the argument when all we're trying to say is that we want you to have the palestinian state but, please, stop shooting missiles and hurting and shooting school buses and schools -- [inaudible conversations] >> excuse me, sir? sir? thank you. >> but -- >> i want to say -- [inaudible conversations] >> how can you accept the fact that we want to make, to give you, that we want peace, and i

was so sorry for the mistakes. but when you're being attacked as israel has been surrounded, the whole country at one point. when we talk about ariel, he was just a man, a young 17-year-old, too, who had to defend, you know, a country, a state of israel and -- >> gilad shah lid was an israeli -- >> you know, we hear you. believe me. >> ma'am, i need to ask you to wrap up your comment. >> the missile causes a -- >> ma'am, i need to ask you to wrap up your comment. do you have a response before we go to the next question? i need you to wrap up your comment, ma'am. thank you. >> yeah. what i have to say about that, israel won all the wars. this is the only country who won all the wars and still is willing to give up what she want.

no other state ever was willing to do that. now, we were with ready to do what egyptian or the jordanian wouldn't do. the egyptian or jordanian would not give the palestinian a state in the place they were holding, the west bank and gaza, and the palestinian were not demanding that. nineteen years, everybody was sitting quietly until '67. only terrorist attacks against israel. but no one thought to establish a palestinian state. why was that? because what you refer to the occupation, this is the excuse and no t the reason -- and not the reason. because we had terror attacks before. >> we're going to try to get to the last three questioners who are in line. sir, go ahead. >> good evening, sir. i you would would like to ask you a question. we both don't speak good english -- >> yours is better, i guess. >> there's a different between the world fight and the word war.

when you win a fight, you don't win a war. when you win the wars, then you win a fight. now, my question is. >> he's making a distinction between wars and fighting. >> yes. actually, i think you misunderstood and you said war and fight. if we were sitting here, are we all from different religions, and we all respect each other. i have friends who are jewsu muslim, christians, i love them all. and you had the most powerful -- [inaudible] after 1 00 years, not after 75 years, would that make you own this property? yes or no? answer my question, please. >> he is asking, what i believe he is asking, whether simply being, israel's being there for a number of years automatically gives them the right to the land. >> so you deny our right to have a jewish state?

>> i don't deny your right to have a jewish state, but not over other people's state. it's your right to eat, to live, but it's not your right to eat, to go take somebody else's food to live and this person dies. i'm saying if we were all in palestine, you have the ability to kick everybody out after 100 years. does that make you own that thing? own that palestine country? >> this is a little question? i'm not aware, i mean, i don't get your question. >> i want your perception, sir. i want your opinion. i want to hear what you have in mind. >> i think i explained his -- he seems to be asking whether the mere fact of -- >> maybe my bad english, i don't know. >> i don't think it's your bad english. have you made your point? are you comfortable? is. >> yes, explain for him, please. >> he seems, he seems to be asking whether or not the fact that israel has been where they have been for as long gives them the rights over the people who were there prior.

>> we jewish state 3,000 years ago in the land of israel. >> okay. that doesn't -- only jewish did? >> he's asking, was it only a jewish state, or were there other? >> for this question, sir, i'm sorry to cut you, i want to ask this person here. you want a reason -- >> we're going to keep the questions directed here, and you can talk after the program if you want to, okay? >> one second. you can have a state for palestine, palestine not for muslims. not only christians have religious place, jesus and jewish. everybody's religious place s so what religion can take? christians can do that, jews can do that, it's for everybody. >> i'm going to ask you to wrap up now. do you want to respond? >> i'm not sure i get the point, but -- [laughter] i'll take english class and come back.

>> go ahead, sir. probably going to get to about three more questions. we're going to have to wrap up, so go ahead. >> thanks for coming to boston, first of all. i would like to say as a human being looking at the israel and palestinian conflict, i'm not arab. as a matter of fact, my mother's jewish. and looking at that i can see that there's a clear humanitarian crisis in palestine where kids are not being fed where people don't have enough food, and israel is blocking this. you might say you came out of gaza, but your clearly -- you're clearly blocking it. there's a humanitarian crisis here, and, please, don't tell me there isn't a crisis, because that's fact. regardless of the rockets and everything that are being attacked, regardless of that, just because somebody's doing that doesn't mean that the kids in palestine deserve to be hungry and their fathers away from them. not everybody in palestine's a criminal. and this is just from looking at a third party perspective. what do you have to say for that?

i mean, clearly, there's suffering, and what is the justification for that? [applause] >> you know, gaza has a border we egypt. they can get everything from egypt. they get all the missiles, all the rockets, all the explosives, all the weapons. they can get everything they need for egypt. are we responsible for gaza? why don't they take it from egypt? i mean -- [inaudible conversations] >> yes. egypt's prime minister was your best friend, as you said before, mubarak said sharon was the best thing for egypt, so now that that's open -- >> thank you, sir. we're going to end the question there. [applause] i'm going to jump over -- jump over you one more time because i've got someone behind you that hasn't spoken. are these the last two? last two questions. we will get yours in, i promise.

>> hi. so i find it extremely hypocritical that israel considers itself a democracy because if israel is a democracy, then how come palestinians don't have the freedom to vote, the freedom of speech, the idf imposes strict checkpoints upon them? so if all of this is happening, then how do you justify that israel is a democracy? >> israel quote for the knesset, and the palestinian vote for the palestinian authority. let me remind you, in 2006, hamas won big majority to the hamas. it meant a lot. >> no, that's not what i'm talking about. >> it shows how peaceful the palestinians are because i know the hamas -- [inaudible] i learned it. and the idea is the jew has no right at all and that the jihad and the idea of eliminating the state of israel is a religious

religious -- [inaudible] how do you say that? [laughter] >> yes. a religious, a religious tenet. >> it's something you cannot argue about. you cannot go to a religious jew and say, okay, you can keep the shah bat, saturday, but only half of it. so if palestinians vote for hamas, i mean, it means a lot. it say something, don't you think? and they voted for hamas. >> i'm talking about the israeli government. like, why don't, why doesn't the israeli goth give palestinians the freedom to do anything? how come when i went to the west bank to visit my relatives, they weren't able to go to jerusalem with me because they're palestinians, and they can't? and the only reason i could go is because i'm an american citizen? i just don't understand why. >> because they're shooting missiles cop instantly. -- constantly. >> okay, stop, stop. this is a conversation. if you wallet to talk among -- want to talk among yourselves

afterwards -- >> [inaudible] >> that's fine. >> you know, if there were not so many people that choose to explode buses, you know, everything would be much easier. >> [inaudible] >> okay. okay. exactly. >> oh. and also -- [applause] >> thank you, but i'm going to wrap another question. >> let's forget -- [inaudible] it was a long time ago. >> [inaudible] >> the idf went into the gaza strip, killed thousands of palestinians, and on top of that cut off the electricity. people could not even survive in the hospital. >> do you know that they fire rockets on the same power station that provides the electricity? >> and israel also -- >> [inaudible] >> also israel stopped aid, like, stops aid to gaza whenever they want. like, why is this happening? if you want, if israel doesn't want peace, i mean, peace is possible, but you have to work for it. you can't just say palestinians can't do anything. >> that's the end of the question. that's the end of your question,

thank you. >> thank you. >> [inaudible] >> oh. >> thank you, we want to get to the next question. >> in the 1950s and '60s when palestinians had the west bank. why? you know why? because they never recognize our right to have a country. >> idf is a terrorist organization. >> all right. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> it's a quick question. >> last question. >> this is the last question. >> yes, sir. >> i just wanted to know your perception on after hosni mubarak left, what do you feel, how do you feel about the egyptian/israeli peace treaty? do you feel that it's going to fall or it's going to stay together? >> i hope it is going to stay. and i'll tell you something, it's a bit of a problem. i would say that inherited -- not inherited -- the problem that when you make peace with

dictatorships as all arab states are dictatorship -- >> [inaudible] >> you have, you have a big problem with that because when somebody else take power and kills the previous one, so the whole thing is if you do have peace or not. i think peace is important to the egyptians not less than to israel. this is the only way they could have gotten back to whole sinai and billions of american dollars, and why would, why wouldn't there be peace we egypt? i mean, we don't have any border dispute or -- >> [inaudible] >> you've had your say, sir, thank you. we're going to close the program now. >> all right. talk about passion. [laughter] >> yeah, i mean, they -- >> i would like, i would like a big round of applause for everyone who spoke up. >> thank you so much. >> and participated and had the courage to say what they wanted to say. everybody in the room.

[applause] >> thanks, become a member. buy the book, it's still out in the lobby. if you would like him to sign it, please, come up this way. thanks so much, have a good night. >> [inaudible] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> is there a nonfiction author or book you'd like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail at booktv@cspan.org, or tweet us at twitter.com/booktv. >> here's a short author interview from c-span's campaign 2012 bus as it traveled the country. >> mr. yeo, what function does the media serve when there are disease outbreaks?

>> well, when the disease outbreak, media has two different functions. one, the media works as news coverage that conveys information to the public from scientific or medical community. and at the same time, media should work as a tool. they provide some different information, diverse perspectives. but during the time of outbreak, it is very important for the media to focus on their fact-based, objective news coverage instead of providing a lot of different interpretations. >> and what constitutes an outbreak? >> well, outbreak is defined as a certain abnormal excess disease occurrence in a certain community or region or group of people. so in case of, for example, in case of west nile virus, nobody

expected that west nile virus would occur in the united states, but it happened in new york. maybe not on a massive scale, but it occurred. so it was defined as outbreak. >> and do you think the news media lived up to their responsibility on how they handle outbreaks, or do you think that they need to work on that? >> it's kind of hard to say because there's no clear -- [inaudible] how much coverage news media should have or should not have. but according to my research, the news coverage was pretty much balanced. usually, we say there are two distinct frameworks when news media cover this kind of outbreak. the first one is usually called diagnostic frame which what is the risk, what happens, how many

people died and who is taking care of what. and then we have prognostic framework which is focused on telling us about what are the causes, how do we do -- what do we do, what should we do to prevent it. and what should we do as a remedial action. so my analysis shows that the news media around new york at the outbreak of west nile virus was pretty much fair and balanced in coverage. >> tell us a little bit about how you did your research and why you used the west nile virus as your case study. >> i was interested in two different topics when i was in doctoral program. the first one was how media works, and the second one was how communication works in this society. and i didn't have any particular interest in west nile virus. west nile virus was not there

yet even. but at the time of planning doctoral dissertation, i was looking for specific topic, and there was west nile virus outbreak. so it was merely a coincidence. if it had been sars, um, that would be dissertation have been about sars. >> so since then there has been sars or the swine flu outbreak. have you noticed media has changed the way they're reporting on health risk? >> well, not really. there was no substantial change in terms of covering health risk issues of outbreak, but i see that there was a substantial change in terms of how people recognize the principles of outbreak communication per se. so, for example, in 2003 who and

cdc came up with five interesting principle of outbreak communications. and it is very helpful for health professionals and officials to deal with outbreak situation. and also it helps the journalists too. >> now that we have the 24-hour news cycle, do you think that the influence of media and reporting on health issues has changed? >> yes, definitely. having a 24-hour cycle news media helps people to access to invaluable information when they run into outbreak situation. yes, definitely. >> and what about social media now that we have facebook and twitter? >> in the same line of thought, yes. it gives ample opportunity to access to this medical ask scientific data -- and scientific data about this outbreak. so it had a lot of potential benefit for the audience. but there is another side that we have to consider.

usually when this outbreak happens, scholars think there is time for what they call psychosocial epidemics. psychosocial epidemics is a term to refer to the crisis period of the time. while the scientific and medical community could not provide any definite answer to this outbreak. so, for example, west nile virus occurred in 1999, and it took several months before the scientists and the medical community came up with a certain explanation about that. so during that time media's covering a lot of reporting as stories and theories, explanations. and people are seeking for answers to remedy, as a remedy for their fear and anxiety. so this is time for this socio--

psychosocial epidemics. psychosocial epidemics can appear in three different ways. the first one is epidemics of fear, the fear is breaking out. and next epidemics of explanation. because the medical and scientific community does not provide any definite answers. there are so many level of explanation of fear in media, and people are consuming those. and third, action. so we relate, with relate to this all explanation that fears, there are so many different action guidelines we cannot necessarily scientific including praying, waiting for the end of the world. so these are called the psychosocial epidemics. so the facebook and twitter, all the social