So--the Uris thread is resurrected. Would that he were.

English patriot has some strong thoughts. Would he, however, leave open the possibility that there are grey areas and that Uris described them.   

The issue of WW2 was one thing and,politically, post WW2 became a problem for the British vis a vis Palestine/Israel.   Exodus gives a fairly accurate description of the situation---it was not unlike the sad tale of the St Louis that FDR managed to turn back to Germany.

You may disagree with him, but you surely have to realize that no person or nation are always correct---the U S and U K had no interest during the war of halting the massacres in the concentration camps. They had a war to wage==a proper one I mightadd.

But, this could lead to a long discussion. Let me just add that Uris wrote many other tomes and they covered many ethnicities and many political situations.   So does Herman Woulk. so did Shirer, anad let us never forget the writers here in the U S that confronted segregation. My point is that Uris, like all the others, knew their material and presented it in an honest way.

By the way---Winston Churchill is my hero. I only mention that because even he had grey areas in which I would disagree and agree.


Bill Hahn