Well, since Tom does not deem that corrections to his misunderstandings are worthwhile to acknowledge (joining the ranks of Sentientmeat but still rungs above others who shall remain nameless), let us continue with updates to the current events …
The Quartet initially seemed willing to give a Hamas led PA some time to change their charter so long as actions were controlled, but now it seems that they are less willing to do so. If moneys are indeed cut off, then Hamas will be forced to beg from Iran and Iran will exact its price from a desperate PA.
Meanwhile some Hamas leaders are making noises about implementing more Islamic law upon a population that is mostly secular. Will this go the way of the Taliban ruled Afganistan?
In other news, Palestinians are burning Danish flags, while Olmert’s adminstration takes strong stands enforcing the law against illegal settlement outposts (which Sharon was never willing to do).
European public opinion had been decidedly pro-Palestinian and sympathetic to the Arab POV for a long time. This is now shifting dramatically. France, never famous for taking stands, is standing in solidarity against the Arab boycott of Danish goods. EU leaders are talking tough about dealing with a Hamas that is unapologetic about their stated end goals. Suddenly the sympathies of the average European seem to be more with Israel’s security concerns than with the plight of refugees. They feel threatened too.
Look for the Quartet to find ways to accept a unilateral Isreali disengagement that does not exactly follow the Green Line.
It seems that my pipedream wasn’t so much of a pipedream after all.
In addition, I think that whining public relations ploys like that cited by Sevastopol go to show weakness and not strength in Hamas. If they didn’t need the money, they wouldn’t be complaining about it. And claims like saying that the world isn’t supporting democracy are simple exercises in obfuscation. Democracy is being supported, but the elected leadership is not. Honestly, the whole article cited read more like a crying child than a state government trying to negotiate from a position of strength. That they’re trying to talk tough while demanding money shows a chink in their armor, and one that should be exploited.
By the way tom. you might want to read up a bit on Benny Morris. He’s hardly an author to use as a cite for anything. I’m not familiar with the other author you mentioned, however.
Wrong on both counts. You dismissed the facts presented by claiming that they were biased. The bias of a source does not change whether claims made are factual or not, so attacking their attitude and not their facts is an ad hominem. Likewise, pointing out that you’ve commited a fallacy is hardly an attack on you personally, Tom., let alone an ad hominem fallacy.
Just who do you claim was being ‘mythical’? The numerous Arab leaders I quoted? Why would they lie? What would their justification be?
Your muddying the waters by claiming that facts are ‘myths’ does not help, at all.
When Aubrey Lippincott the U.S. Consul General in Haifa, wrote on April 22, 1948, “local mufti dominated Arab leaders” were urging “all Arabs to leave the city, and large numbers did so.”
Was he a myth? Was he lying? Was there already a zionist conspiracy? Because, I hope you realize, that your claims of the ‘mythic’ nature of facts require a vast and wide reaching conspiracy which would have had to have control over Arab, British, and American political figures. Because all of them agree that at least a partial cause was the Arab leaders’ instructions to flee. In some cases backed up with evacuation of women and children by Arab troops.
I was just pointing out that your rhetoric was fairly well divorced from reality. You claimed that they didn’t do anything, and yet they took in 40,000 refugees over four years. (Four, not 20.) You also ignored and continue to ignore the fact that the Israelies tries to repatriate the Palestinian population but the Arab states refused with the “three noes”. And instead of blaming them, you place all the blame on Israel to the degree that you claimed they didn’t even do anything about the regugees.
Interesting… so the Arab nations create propaganda about women being raped, and it’s the Israelis fault for not combatting the propaganda better? Also, you are again letting your rhetoric get away from you. Numerous appeals were made to the Arabs to stay, not just at Haifa. Including but not limited to the Israeli Declaration of Independence.
Deir Yassin- April 9, 1948
Immediately condemned by Jewish leaders, the Haganah, and Ben Gurion sent a letter to the King of Jordan apologizing for it and calling it “a black stain on the honour of the Jewish nation.”
Haifa- April 26, 1948
"“Every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives, to get their shops and businesses open and to be assured that their lives and interests will be safe. [However] …A large road convoy, escorted by [British] military . . . left Haifa for Beirut yesterday. . . . Evacuation by sea goes on steadily. …[Two days later, the Jews were] still making every effort to persuade the Arab populace to remain and to settle back into their normal lives in the towns… [as for the Arabs,] another convoy left Tireh for Transjordan, and the evacuation by sea continues. The quays and harbor are still crowded with refugees and their household effects, all omitting no opportunity to get a place an one of the boats leaving Haifa.” - Haifa District HQ of the British Police
Isreali Declaration of Independence- May 14, 1948
“In the midst of wanton aggression, we yet call upon the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve the ways of peace and play their part in the development of the State, on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its bodies and institutions…We extend our hand in peace and neighborliness to all the neighboring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all.”
So, as I pointed out, your rhetoric doesn’t have much in common with facts, and like your claim that 40,000 refugees absorbed was ‘nothing’, likewise, your claim that Israel did ‘nothing’ to stop Arabs from leaving or to minimize the effects of Deir Yassin are false.
So the Arab military evacuations of their women and children aren’t evidence that they were ‘lured away’ by Arab actions? Arab political leaders who have gone on record as being partially to blame aren’t evidence? Those are all 'myth’s too?
And what is this talk of ‘no evidence’ anyway? Were all 300,000 interviewed? How do you propose to know, with certainty, the motivations of 300,000 men, women, and children without asking them?
They were seized because they were guarding the road between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem which were under siege in a war whose stated intent was genocide.
I find it odd, by the way, that you lay into Israel for not doing anything to discourage Arab emigration even though in fact that did, while ignoring the massacres of Jews and the stated goal of genocide on the part of the Arabs. Why excuse the actions of the Palestinians due to Israel actions, but not realize that those Israeli actions were taken to avoid extermination?
It was a village, right next to a ridge. Is it really so crazy to suppose that people could’ve used the village as a base of operations and climbed the ridge? And then had the high ground over the road?
What are you talking about? Nothing you posted about Palestinian population contradicts anything I have posted. I recognize the importance of the information, but I don’t go posting acknowledgements of every post submitted to a thread.
Now you are being silly. Attacking a source for bias is not an ad hominem. Had I dismissed your posts on the grounds that you are “just another Zionist shill,” (which I do not believe), that would be an ad hominem attacking your person as the source. You, on the other hand, used an erroneous claim of ad hominem to attack my post with a claim of “poor form.” You were attacking me as the presenter, not the information–that is ad hominem.
Now, I would not rely on Benny Morris for a primary source, but much of the original source support that he relies upon (however oddly he uses it) does support other information that is provided.
As to the general situation: the myth to which I allude, (using the word in the way that I always use the word myth: a story told by a people to explain and reinforce a truth as they see it) is that the Arabs simply got up and left at the urging of outside Arabs while the Jews pleaded for them to stay.
Look at your own examples. You quote an independent official noting that a mufti was calling for people to evacuate Haifa–which is exactly the point I made earlier, that while the event actually occurred, (Arabs urging evacuation while Jews council staying put), it occurred not throughout all of the region, but in the particular city of Haifa, and has been generalized to cover all the region. In fact, every single one of your citations to outside Arabs urging flight and Jews arguing against flight point to Haifa–just as I pointed out.
As to Deir Yassin: if it was such a security risk, then why did Shaltiel have to be argued into attacking it, to begin with and specifically argued into letting Lehi and Irgun carry out the attack? I have never seen any evidence presented (other than by people explicitly defending Lehi and Irgun, as opposed to people describing the actions of the war) that the Haganah even included the attack in their Operation Nachshon–the specific operation to maintain the road open to Jerusalem.
However, you raised the “legitimate target” argument and neither that nor the actual massacre was my point. There were atrocities aplenty in that war and no claim that the Arabs were free of guilt has any credence.
The point was, expressly, that once the massacre happened (and was acknowledged by the Israeli leadership, including a pro forma apology), that leadership did nothing to set the facts straight, relying on the rumors that it was larger and worse than it actually was to provide impetus to frighten Arabs into fleeing the land in large numbers. I cannot find an online citation at the moment, but I have seen a statement by Menachem Begin that indicates that he viewed Deir Yassin as important specifically because of the way that it encouraged Arabs to flee.
Yes, the Arab leadership played up the massacre (and either invented the claims of rape or took existing but unverified claims of rape and enlarged upon them) to whip up the fighting frenzy of the surrounding nations. However, there was never an attempt by the Haganah or the Israeli leadership to set forth the truth of the matter or to point out the the exaggerations in the story. They were quite happy that the story was having the effect that it had, getting Arabs out of the way.
Later, the story of the evacuation of Haifa was set in place as the “typical” event regarding Arab flight, even though it was actually limited to a single city. I would not accept Arab propaganda that the Israelis were merely murderous thugs attempting to steal the land. I even accept that in the midst of a war, encouraging potentially hostile peoples to remove themselves from an area where they could be used as fifth column fighters is not only practical, but possibly necessary. But I think it is important to stop propagating the story that the Arab flight was simply a matter of leaving at the request of outside Arab calls as though the Israelis were simply innocent bystanders in that event.
In other words, if it was necessary for the establishment of Israel, so be it, but it is wrong to claim that the Israelis had no part in the process.
Have you ever read Meir Pail/Pilevsky’s acount of the attack? Did you fail to notice the part where the Jewish settlers of Shivat Gaul came into Deir Yassin cursing the Irgun and Lehi for breaking the truce? Again, among world massacres, Deir Yassin is not the worst and one can make some mitigating claims about it (althought Pail indicates that Shaltiel had to be argued into an attack, so grand claims of its improtance seem strained, at best), but the important aspect of the event is the choice by the Israelis to allow the Arabs to use it as propaganda rather than setting the record straight. Was it the responsibility of the Israelis to counter Arab lies? Possibly not. On the other hand, when defenders of Israel ignore the event and its aftermath, looking to the event of Haifa to pretend that there was never any ethnic cleansing, then I think that needs to be corrected.
Yes. It is. Instead of debating the factual nature of the claims you attack their viewpoint. That’s a textbook ad hominem fallacy. And just to clear it up, it was an ad hominem fallacy direted at the cite, not at me.
Use of ad hominems instead of addressing facts is poor form.
No. I was ‘attacking’ the fact that you disregarded facts via an ad hominem fallacy and that such tactics were poor form. I was ‘attacking’ the presentation, not the presenter.
That’s not what was presented, but that a confluence of forces including but not limited to Arab appeals, caused the refugee problem.
Shall I provide you with cites showing other places in which there were both appeals made to leave and in some cases armed Arab troops who encouraged compliance? Just say the word and I’ll do so.
What supports this claim you’re making? The Arab leaders’ quotes I have cited do not mention the word Haifa. Why have you decided that they ‘point to Haifa’ instead of being general statements about the war? Does it really make sense that, when discussing the entire reguee problem due to the entire war, not one Arab leader saw fit to point out that it was a limited and isolated incident he was talking about? Wouldn’t that be a little odd?
Because quite simply there was no IDF yet and no unifed command structure. Do you have proof that it was done to terrorize all Arabs living in Palestine, as you have suggested? Because there are communiques at that time period which do indeed state that the town can’t be left in a position where Arab troops could recapture it, as it would constitute a security risk.
So, while it may not have been a unanimous decision to attack based on security concerns, neither was that not a factor in some people’s thinking. I can provide a cite to that effect as well, if you would like.
tom, you are again attacking people’s background rather than the factual nature of their claims.
Shaltiel’s orders at the time, were:
Can you take issue with the factual nature of this quote, or claim that it is not genuine, rather than attacking the background of those who present it?
I think you are imposing an unrealistic burden of guilt on the Israelis. The Arabs had their own propaganda network that was going, and the Israelis did try their best to convince Arabs to stay, both by condemning Deir Yassin and by specifially asking them to stay in the Declaration of Independence. Why not blame the Arabs for creating and distributing such propaganda rather than the Israelis for not combatting it well enough?
I’d be curious about the context, myself. But even if true, Begin was also a leader of Irgun, but not of any unified Israeli military force. That, of course, brings into question whether or not his testimony, to any effect, can represent the goals and desires of anybody but his faction, and, indeed, anybody but himself.
Full stop.
That’s where responsibility lies.
So the success of the Arab propaganda was the Israelis’ fault? Why not blame those who were actually creating and using the propaganda? Whether or not the Israelis were ‘happy’ at the result, the proximal cause is still Arab actions. Were the Israelis supposed to babysit them and make sure that none of their lies were too outrageous?
That doesn’t always seem to work too well, as, even now, and indeed in this thread, we have people talking about how Israel wants to kill all the Palestinians. Despite continual denials and indeed peace offerings on Israel’s behalf. I think you’re being too generous with the people who were responsibile with spreading the propaganda and too harsh with those who really weren’t in much of a position to stop it.
Even if we are to ignore things like the Decleration of Independence and the condemnations of Deir Yassin, how does that change the fact that Arab propaganda and Arab demands to leave had an effect? No, it was not all of the effect, but nor is it untrue that it had an effect. The Arab leaders of the time thought it had a significant effect, and they never specified that they were talking about Haifa to the exclusion of the rest of the war.
I have done my best to present the case that there were multiple factors, and that was one of them, and if the Arab leaders are to be believed, a major cause. I find nothing in them that specifically refrences Haifa, and while I do not currently have the quotes in their full context I would be happy to dig them up.
If I have claimed that they had no part in the process then I was wrong. It’s been a long thread but I don’t think I claimed that. If I did I’ll be happy to retract it as factually incorrect.
No, I haven’t read that. But what is it indended to prove?
And yet Shaltiel said " I would like to call your attention to the fact that the occupation and holding of Dir Yassin is one of the stages in our overall plan."
The more important aspect is the Arab leaders’ use of it as propaganda. Holding the Israelis responsible for the lies of the Arab leaders is somewhat odd. While fighting a war for their very survival, perhaps they didn’t have time to design a massive PR campaign?
Definitely not. If I have taken to smashing myself in the hand with a hammer again and again in order to gain sympathy, and you do not stop me, it does not become your fault unless you are my legal guardian.
Tom, here is the fiction that I’ve attempted to relieve you of
(bolding mine)
Palestinians were not displaced by Jewish returnees. This immigration was not at all like the process of taking of Indian lands in The Americas. Instead Zionist investment was bringing previously unheard of levels of prosperity and population growth to the region’s Arab population with massive new Arab immigration particularly to areas near the Jews.
Less than 1% of Arab families left their farms and less than 1% of arable land acrage left Arab possession or tenanted control. Jews paid tenant farmers money in addition to the land owners that they were not legally obligated to pay. “The people of Palestine enjoyed a far higher standard of living in 1945 than they did in 1922. The standard of living and the welfare of the Arabs of Palestine rose much more quickly than they did in neighboring countries. In 1922-25, average infant mortality for Muslims was 190.39 per thousand infants. By 1938, this figure was 127.58 per thousand. By way of comparison, Infant mortality in neighboring Egypt was 163 per thousand. In Rumania in that year, the report of the League Mandates commission tells us that infant mortality was 183 per thousand, and in Poland it was 140 per thousand.3” source- http://www.zionism-israel.com/impact_of_zionism.htm
I’d like to point out that the crux of this issue is a question of systems. Israel was more suited to work with the western system than the Palestinians, so they worked it and came out on top. The Palestinians did not have the same system, and therefore were not as well suited to the task of navigating that western bureaucracy. There were powerful jews working the Zionist National Congress Angle with the British authorities and the League of Nations since the turn of the century. The British went in there imposed their system and then expected the people who were already there to conform to the land deeds that they issued. It’s sort of like the scene in Hitchhiker’s guide to the Galaxy where the Vogons talk about the plans to demolish Earth being on display for 50 years, and that if the Humans had shown the slightest bit of care for it they would have bothered to file a complaint. The Palestinians that are in the refugee camps are not the Arabs that were savvy enough to adapt to a western system, they were the dirt farmers, and they DID lodge their complaints and those complaints were ignored. The fact of the matter is they weren’t really consulted in the machinations that created the land of Israel, and to say “Their people abandoned them” is a misnomer as well because the aristocratic Arabs that benefitted by the creation of Jordan certainly were not the Palestinians’ ‘people’. So over the years they have decided that the west doesn’t care about their plight and that the only way to have their homeland back is to push the jews into the sea. This of course is something that the other Arab nations encourage because a weak Israel is in their best interests so why not?
You bastard, you owe me a new keyboard. Coca-Cola Black Cherry Vanilla snorted out my nose. Teh pain!
Really now. I see a huge number of people, Democrats and Republicans alike, jumping on the “Israel is a rat-bastard oppresors” bandwagon. “Palestianians” manipulate the western bureaucracy and media just fine, to t6he point that everytime a discussion about Isrtael occurs, people have to refute the same Og-damned points again and again. In addition, if the “palestiainans” were bad at “navigating the western bureaucracy”, then the “western bureaucracy” would have told them to stop trying to destroy a country, suck it up and sign up for Jordanian citizenshi, a long time ago.
My comment was prompted by the overall presentation and not limited to quotes by leaders. And, again it would be interesting to see actual Arab statements at the time (outside of Haifa) that did not follow directly on the reports of the Deir Yassin massacre.
That is not how you presented it–at least that is not how your presentation reads. When I go through your posts, I find attack after attack on Arab or Palestinian actions or words with some minor disclaimers that maybe the Israelis made an error or two.
I do not even object to the actual actions taken by the Israelis who correctly saw the war as truly a matter of life and death for their nation and themselves. I do object to the portrayal of those actions in a way that makes it sound as though they bore no responsibility for the refugees that resulted.
I have made no claim that Deir Yassin was ordered for the purpose of striking terror. I suspect that it was simply an attempt by Lehi and Irgun to prove that they could be players in the upcoming war–a point they pretty thoroughly disproved in this action.
However, once the word of the massacre got out and the Israeli leaders saw its effect, I think they were quite happy to use the rumors to “encourage” flight by Arab villagers.
All right, that makes sense. However, that was not included in your first link which only noted:
I have never claimed that the Jews deliberately “stole” the land, only that there was a feeling of that among the Arab population. The section I quote here notes that immigrant Jews were able to purchase 20% of the arable land, which is consistent with that feeling among the Arabs.
With your further information noting that fewer than 1% of the Arabs were actually forced off their lands, it is clearer now that the “feelings” were probably more due to the antisemitism that was being pushed by several Arab leaders and were not based in reality.
Erek, you are painting in very broad brushstrokes. Certainly it is true that those who ended up in the camps were not those who knew how to play the systems, but that is a far cry from saying that Arabs of the region (many who developed the identity of Palestinian but who until then were not self-identified as such) did not, as a group, know how to play the system. Those who ended up in the camps were the common man working stiffs who were manipulated by Arab leadership. These average Joes were actually enjoying unprecedented prosperity as a direct result of Jewish return and investment, yet their leadership (in particular the Nazi collaborator, the Grand Mufti) manipulated them into believing that they were being dispossesed and that the Jews had all sorts of neferious plans. These Arab leaders orchestrated riots and pograms against Jews. They refused compromises offered by the Peel Plan that would have resticted Jewish territory to two enclaves, one from Tel Aviv to Hadera and one below it. They refused to participate in any proposed ruling body that contained any Jewish representation. Transjordan was created as an independent state and carved out of the Palestinian Mandate precisely because some Arabs knew how to play the game. No, Arab leadership of the region knew how to play, they just didn’t care about the outcomes for the average guy. There were reasons for the attacks, but they were not the best interests of the typical Palestinian Arab. They were the self-interests of the powerful Arab leaders with a little resentment that the historic second-class dhimmi was coming in as an equal with a little imported Western antisemitism thrown into the mix as well.
Sev, I don’t know if my response belongs here. I’ll keep it succint. It is MHO that the best of this board are very willing to learn that they have been mistaken and to acknowledge that they have been mistaken when they are shown reliable evidence that their previous belief was incorrect. I’ve seen it here many times, and I am proud to admit that I have found myself to be wrong here on quite a few occasssions. Despite the temptation to just slink away and act as if that point was just never seen when I have been shown to be mistaken, I have instead acknowledged that I have been taught something that I did not know. When posters post up a commonly held false belief and I provide the “straight dope” that it is in fact a false belief with solid evidence and reliable citations, I consider it polite for a poster acknowledge that I have provided that same service of education for them. Tom has shown that behavior (which I had come to expect of him) in his last post. One example in this thread of less than the best has been the false map of “The Fence/Wall” that has been propagated by Gush Shalom and my citation of more recent maps with no acknowledgement of that correction forthcoming. The worst of us are posters who deny what has been posted has been posted and whose views are totally independent of any facts. We have seen this behavior in this thread as well. More comment than that can be found by looking in the Pit.
Nope, I didn’t. Naww awwww.
(Of course, and you could cite the post I posted them in.)
But:
The first cite was from The Economist, not Arab leaders.
The second cite did not quote Arab leaders.
The third cite was from British agents, not Arab leaders.
Likewise, the fourth cite does not quote Arab leaders.
You said that
But the Arab leaders who I cited do not mention Haifa. If you were refering to my citations which in turn cite Arabs then I misunderstood, but I thought you were talking about my citations of outside Arabs who urged flight. I think you can see how I made that mistake?
Ah, but some of the quotes I presented by Arab leaders and even the economist quote state that there were multiple factors. But I’ll happily concede that I could’ve been tigheter in my presentation.
I don’t follow… statements from whom, about what, proving what? Can you elaborate?
But… that’s saying that there were numerous factors and that the Israelis made mistakes or, if you prefer, were sometimes at fault. Yes, I do believe that most of the blame lies with the Arab regimes, but not all of it.
Not no responsibility, but as I see it and as I’ve argued, certainly nowhere near as much as the Arab regimes. This may be a sticking point for us; for instance you blame Israel instead of the Arab regimes for not absorbing the refugees after '67, and you blame Israel instead of the Arab regimes for using propaganda which was ultimately damaging to the Palestinian populace.
Perhaps I’m misreading that, but it sure looks like you were saying that the value to be found in attacking Deir Yassin was “frightening the Arab populace.”
But did they do any ‘encouraging’ with these rumors? I thought it was the Arab leaders who transmitted these bits of propaganda. No?
This post is rather long and a little obscure. In a thread that is also on the lengthy side. As you have a stated goal of brevity, could you directly state the evidence you refer to?
It would be interesting to find a statement from a dated proclamation or a radio address with a particular date on it (rather than reminiscences or reflections from the early 1950s or later), that preceded the news of Deir Yassin, in which an Arab leader specifically addresses the entire Mandate region, calling for all Arabs to actually leave the area so that they could return after the war. (We know that such declarations were made to the city of Haifa, but there is a serious lack of evidence for general calls of that nature prior to Deir Yassin.)
The standard refrain on this issue (that you have not explicitly made), is that in the months leading up to the war, the Arab leadership made a series of calls on the people of the region to leave their homes so that the Arab armies could crush the Israelis after which the people could return and take back their own homes as well as the land and property of the Israelis.
However, if there was no long propaganda campaign matching that description, but there was an intense campaign immediately following Deir Yassin in which people were warned to flee for their lives, it changes the texture of the event, completely. (Boasts of the swift victory of the united Arab forces sound very much, to me, like the boasts of both sides prior to April, 1861 in the U.S. or the calls to arms in Europe in late July, 1914. I wonder if, perhaps, too much is made of the typical drum beating that precedes many wars, especially when there is a lot of build-up prior to the hostilities.)
In the first scenario, arrogant and foolish Arab leaders are preparing to launch a war that they have chosen to wage and are simply telling “their” people to avoid being caught in the crossfire.
In the second scenario, Arab leaders who recognize that war is inevitable are pointing out to “their” people that they are in danger of falling prey to Israeli violence and that they will be safer waiting outside the battle zone until the war has completed.
The antisemitic virulence is no less and cannot be defended, but it changes the complexion from one of an eager desire to begin a war of aggression to a fatalistic realization that too many moves had been taken that left both sides with little room to find a peaceful solution. (And I am not denying that many Arabs did want to attack Israel, but it seems that many also felt they had no choice.)
However, I am not claiming that that was the prior intent, only that it was the grasped opportunity after the fact. As I said, I think the boys in Irgun and Lehi wanted to make a demonstration of their fighting abilities, pled their case to Shaltiel who, knowing that the whole region needed to by occupied some time, agreed to their request. It was only after the leadership saw the reaction to the news among the Arabs that they decided that letting the propaganda be distributed, including the lies, without attempting to set the record straight was in their best interest.
Aside from the “apology” given to the King of Jordan, (an implicit acknowledgement that a wrong had been committed), the Israeli leadership made no effort to set the record straight. They did not broadcast their own version of events even though they knew very well what the Arabs were claiming. Given that Jewish and Arab settlements and neighborhoods stood adjacent to each other throughout the region, there is no chance that they did not see the effect it had on the Arabs. Given the nature of propaganda, it is an extraordinary act for one side to allow the other to spread lies about it, unremarked, giving the impression that the stories are true.
Sev I am mindful of hewing to appropriate discussion for this venue. Finn documented the behavior to which I refer in a Pit thread with your name on it. That venue is more appropriate for critique of posting behaviors.
I agree. I’ll do my best to dig it up in the next day or two. (Or four of five as I’m heading out of state for a while)
I stumbled across a cite in the last 48 hours which had, I think, an official of the Arab League stating that the propaganda about Deir Yassin was designed to encourage the will to fight and that it backfired and resulted in people fleeing. I’ll see if I can’t find it again.
Perhaps. I’d be interested to see the timeline on statements made, but it might be hard to find out as there’s been a good deal of obfuscation on both sides. I’d wager it’s a point of disagreement between us, but I’d still say that the lion’s share of the blame lies lies on those who spread the propaganda.
Well, the apology was a good thing as, I think, it suggested that such events would not be repeated. I’d also wonder if there was any attempt to gainsay the propaganda, and if it went on at the local level. I’ll try to dig up any facts on that as well. But, then again I still don’t see failing to prevent damaging propaganda as morally equivelant to spreading that propaganda.
I definitely need to do more digging on that count. The more I’ve been researching Deir Yassin, the more it seems that a lot of folks are lying on both sides. I’ve seen claims that women really were raped and sites saying that there wasn’t really a truce and that there some of the residents were serving as snipers. Many of them are cited. I need to do much more research as it doesn’t seem to be as simple as I’d first assumed.
I wonder if there were community-based refutations going on, I’ll do a bunch of digging. I also wonder if, perhaps, the attitude was simply that they wouldn’t be believed when disagreeing with the Arab leaders.
I will definitely need to do a good bit more research, and might open a new GD thread so as not to hijack this one any further.
Speaking of which, how about them Hamas folks, eh?
I’m not your grammar teacher Shodan. Find a friend to teach you what “directly state the evidence” means.
Meantime, it clearly takes a direct order to get a proper response. Quote the relevant evidence. DSeid does not appear have the confidence to endorse it. Do you?
A citation has been provided. With a link now. That’s as much as I’ll do in GD. Honestly I generally do not waste my energy on this stuff in the Pit much either. Just not my usual style.