Talk:Deir Yassin massacre

Who deleted the original page and directed it to an entry with anti-Israel biased title? Indeed, the title makes it clear that there is no dispute that there was a massacre. In point of fact, no massacre has ever been proven. The only proof offered in thelast 50 years has consistently shown that the supposed massacre of over 300 Arab civilians never took place. No proof of this massacre of civilians exists. In stark contrast, the only proof is that a battle did indeed take place, among a fortified Arab source of attacks against Jews, and that in the course of this battle less than 120 Arabs dies. I understand that Arabs claim that all these people (or almost all of them) were not involved in the fighting. But no proof whatsoever exists for this claim. I also understand that Arabs claim that "the Jews" mass murdered over 300 civilians. But no proof these 300 people exists! Even the Palestinians now admit that these numbers were a gross distortion. So why is this article so heavilly biased towards accepting these unproven claims as indisputable facts? RK

---

Jennifer, please list some sources for your claims other than biased Arab ones. -- Zoe

---

The most detailed study of the incident to this date was made in 1987 by independent Palestinian college researches at Bir Zeit University. They found that although there was indeed a massacre "the like of which has seldom been seen",

At the time, the Jewish leadership did not deny that there had been a massacre, by forces not under its control, and in fact apologized to King Abdullah of Jordan. http://www.ariga.com/peacewatch/dy/dycg.htm

Mordehai Gihon, intelligence officer of the Haganah Etzioni Brigade, wrote in his report, submitted April 10 1948:The murder of falachim and innocent citizens, faithful allies of the western sector, who kept faith despite pressure from the gangs, even during the conquest of Sharfa, {Mt Herzl} may lose us the trust of all those Arabs who hoped to be saved from destruction by agreements with us.

Dr Engel, who visited the village with the Red Cross on April 12, reported:"...It was clear that they (the attackers) had gone from house to house and shot the people at close range. I was a doctor in the German army for 5 years, in WWI, but I had not seen such a horrifying spectacle."

Eliahu Arbel, an officer of the Haganah, visited Deir Yassin on April 10, 1948 at the request of Haganah District Commander David Shaltiel. He wrote: "On the following day, after the operation, I inspected the village, in accordance with the order of General Shaltiel. Accompanied by an officer of the attacking unit, I saw the horrors that the fighters had created. I saw bodies of women and children, who were murdered in their houses in cold blood by gun fire, with no signs of battle and not as the result of blowing up the houses."

And so on and so on... Then we also have a few hundred eye-witnesses who claims that there was a massacre but they are obviously all pro-Arabic? Show a credible source (ZOA is not) that claims there was no massacre. --BL

This is obviously anti-Jew propaganda, created by Arabs. No proof of this massacre of civilians exists. show us the proof - where is it? Besides, everyone knows that the IDF never, ever acts in this kind of way at all. And even if they did, they deserved it. Stevert

This sounds like satire, Stevert. But people will take you seriously here. Tlogmer

---

The following was moved from Talk:Deir Yassin incident:

This is awfully biased to the verge of propaganda. Even the name.. the Deir Yassin INCIDENT???? --BL

The join in the effort to balance these pages. It appears Jennifer is going to make a stand. I'll chip in as far as I can too. -- GayCom

the fire was quickly neutralized by Haganah units using mortar fire sometime between 10:00 or 12:00 A.M, after which Haganah units left. (Levi, Yitzhak, op. cit. p343-344; Pail and Isseroff, op. cit

If I understand correctly, Morris cites exactly the same sources to say the opposite. How can one explain the contradiction?

--Uri

---

Yugoslavian Muslim officer, whose identification papers indicated he had been with the all-Muslim units of the Nazi SS that had been organized in Yugoslavia during World War II by Haj Amin el-Husseini, the Palestinian Arab leader and Nazi collaborator. (Milstein, p.263 (interview with Zalivensky).)

Sid Zion says the Yugoslav was a SS, but the source (Uri Milstein) they are quoting on that statement does not mention that.

It is not clear whether the civilians had chosen to stay of their own free, or were held as human shields by Arab soldiers who thought their presence would deter the Jewish forces. (Milstein, pp.264-265, interviews with Ezra Yachin, Mordechai Ra'anan, Benzion Cohen and Yehuda Lapidot; Testimonies of Mordechai Ra'anan, Benzion Cohen, and Yehuda Lapidot.)

That source [1] doesn't say anything about the Arabs using human shields. --[user:BL|BL]

---

I was the one who originally removed the "pro-only-a-battle"-quotes. Most of those quotes were either blatant falsifications, misquotes or quotes cut in half. IMHO, they don't belong to the page, because then you got to write paragraphs like "the gathering Uri Milstein refers to was a meeting held by the ALA between the village elders of Deir Yassin and Ein Kareem requesting them to allow troops in their villages, Deir Yassin refused and the troops left the village this was documented by the Haganah intelligence. Uri Milstein also writes about their departure but this certain malicious quote is most likely orginated in Sid Zion's 'Deir Yassin - history of a lie' ".

It doesn't make sense to include them as they aren't true and easily rebutted. They fit better in an article about the pro-only-a-battle arguments and their rebuttals. Then stuff like this:

Until recently, Arab sources claimed that there was a deliberate massacre of several hundred Arab civilians, and refer to this incident as the Deir Yassin massacre. In this view, the massacre was part of a Zionist plan to ethnically cleanse Palestine of Arabs. In later years Palestinian university scholars have reanalyzed earlier data, and have come to the conclusion that the earlier reports were greatly exagerrated, that many of the casualties were caused by warfare and fighting (as opposed to earlier claims of genocide),

A statement based on a source that is unsourced. I really wish the informal rule "do not remove unless its proven false" would change to "remove unless its sourced". BL 00:53, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Huh? I don't know what you are talking about. The Palestinian Arab survey sources are named and cited. It is the previous claims about their being a deliberate massacre of hundreds of civilians which even the Palestinians themselves now admit is a gross exagerration, and false. RK 14:27, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

In reply to RK:

Huh? I don't know what you are talking about. The Palestinian Arab survey sources are named and cited.

Really? From the article:

Until recently, Arab sources claimed....

I've seen you use this technique many times before. Put words in other peoples mouths to support your personal view. Where are these arab sources? Tell me! Paste here cause you see things I cannot find. Furthermore:

claimed that there was a deliberate massacre of several hundred Arab civilians

First the number. Severeal hundred? Are this statement from a written source or on the web? Do you speak Arabic and have access to sources I cannot read? Isn't it true that the infladed number orginated from an Irgun officers mouth? Also, the fact that there was a massacre is, even among those Zionists, the accepted view.

In later years Palestinian university scholars have reanalyzed earlier data, and have come to the conclusion that the earlier reports were greatly exagerrated, that many of the casualties were caused by warfare and fighting (as opposed to earlier claims of genocide),

Does this paragraph refer to Deir Yassin or the 1948 war? In either case it is wrong and if the study referred to is the one from the Bir Zeit university it showed for everyone to see that the Haganah was responsible for executing the ethnical cleansing of Palestine.

Huh? The Palestinian Bir Zeit university study showed no such thing. Is this a bad joke? The Palestinian study admitted that their propaganda of many hundreds of murders was false, and exagerrated by over 100%! They also admitted that many of these deaths were from battle, not genocide. Finally, nothing in their report says anything about the "ethnic cleansing" of all of Palestine. We will probably have to revert your changes, because your statements have no basis in reality at all. You are currently so pro-Palestinian biased that you seem to be outdoing their own rejected propaganda! For shame. RK

And in a preemptive effort to stop you from revering I ask you again, should Sid Zions maliciously and blatantly wrong quotes be left in the article along with rebuttals showing what a lying dishonest ass he is or should they be removed? BL 20:21, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Denouncing him as a "lying dishonest ass" is curious, as you (see above) wrote some rather obvious untruths about the recent Palestinian study from Bir Zeir university. Given this fact, our trust in you is pretty thin, at best. RK 22:56, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Actually Deir Yassin did overlook the main road going into Jerusalem. But not the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem but another large road running south on the eastern side between Jerusalem and Deir Yassin. If I remember correctly. BL 16:16, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I don't believe so. My information came from a British topological survey map. The geographical layout is accurately shown here: http://domino.un.org/maps/m0104_1b.gif . You can see the main road to Tel-Aviv about a mile to the north and a lesser road about the same distance to the south. There are no closer roads of significance. From the contours on the survey map it is clear that the main Tel-Aviv road was not visible from Deir Yassin except possibly in the far distance to the west. Of course the reason Deir Yassin is often claimed to have been overlooking the road is to enhance its military importance. -- zero 11:29, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Just noticed this edit. Actually, given the topography, Deir Yassin does overlook the road as it passes Motza and makes the final ascent to Jerusalem. Been there, seen it. Danny

So have I, but I wasn't looking for that sort of information. Anyway, I just spoke to someone who lives there and he confirms that some sections of the road are visible at a distance slightly less than a mile. Whether that counts as "overlooking" is another matter. It was much too far from the road for small arms fire to be a danger to vehicles on the road, and nobody ever claimed Deir Yassin had artillery. I still maintain that associating it with the road using words like "overlooking" is propagandistic. It gives the impression that travelers on the road had to pass beside/below Deir Yassin, but they didn't. It doesn't even correspond to the reason given by the Hagana commander at the time for approving the attack; his idea was to built an airstrip nearby. I must look at that topographic map again, as I'm sure it showed a large hill between the village and the road. Maybe something (the road?) has moved since the map was made in 1918? -- zero 12:35, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The road actually cuts through Motza, with most of the village to the right, but a few houses to the left. After a few hundred meters of living space, there is the steep incline, now topped by the Jewish neighborhood of Har Nof (Mountain with a View, literally). Har Nof was built on the lands of Deir Yassin. From there, small artillery or even rifle fire shooting down can easily hit the road. It is just slightly more than the summit-to-road distance by Bab el-Wad. One of the issues, of course, seems to be the actual definition of village boundaries--do they include the surrounding agricultural lands, some of which were expropriated for the building of Motza. These would be registered in the Tabu as belonging to Deir Yassin and considered part of the village, even though the actuall homes would be in a more constricted area. Some of this would have extended into what is now the new housing developments in Motza. Danny 13:15, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The types of rifles found in Arab villages in 1948 were useless beyond a few hundred yards and not even the most enthusiastic Irgun account claims they had artillery, light or otherwise. Deir Yassin village was located at the southern (upper) end of the present Har Nof, near the entrance. It was much smaller than Har Nof is now (only about 700 people). One of the buildings of Deir Yassin became a psychiatric hospital if that helps locate it. -- zero 13:59, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, it is now called the Ezrat Nashim Hospital--I went there once to help a friend do a magazine article on Jerusalem Syndrome. You are right that the village proper was considerably smaller than Har Nof (which I think is an ugly scar on an otherwise serene landscape), but the adjacent land was considerably extensive, regardless of the population. If my memory serves me correct and the builders haven't done too much damage, you can still see a well from the village at the southeast corner of Har Nof, which has an excellent view of the road. From what I last remember, it was supposed to be turned into a park but that was some years ago. Essentially, though, I think the disagreemnt (if there is one) between us is just about how the term village is defined. Does it include the adjacent land that was worked by the villagers and to which they had regular access or not. Regardless (and regardless of whether they had a clear shot at the road or not), it hardly excuses the brutality of the massacre. Danny

If this is true, it would seem pretty easy to include both pieces of information, and thus be even more informative. DanKeshet

This map http://www.allthatremains.com/Acre/Maps/Story582.html has Deir Yassin (the dot) on a location about 1 km away from either road. But there are two roads on the northern side, one in white (the "old road"?), and one in red which is about 2 km away and is probably the "main road". It also shows a road that goes directly to Deir Yassin. BL 21:46, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Apparently my library has a 1935 topographic map at 1:100,000 (1cm=1km) which shows all roads and buildings. Give me a few days and I'll upload a scan. --zero 22:39, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I found the map. Deir Yassin was actually on top of the hill (unusually for Arab villages) rather than on the slope. The nearest visible stretch of the main road was 1.2km away. I'm waiting for someone to send me a scan of a modern street directory so it can be overlaid; then I'll upload it. --zero 12:14, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No, not Ezrat Nashim Hospital, but the Kfar Shaul mental hospital which is about 1km south east of Ezrat Nashim. It is uphill just west of Har Nof, not actually in Har Nof as the suburbs are labeled in the phone book. --zero 11:15, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)

---

I removed this:

Yunes Ahmed Assad had a completely different view of the incident and was quoted saying in Al Urdun (a Jordanian newspaper): The Jews never intended to harm the population of the village, but were forced to do so after they encountered fire from the population, which killed the Irgun commander. Al Urdun (Jordanian Newspaper), April 9, 1953, quoted by the Israel Office of Information, under Golda Meir, 1960

because nobody has ever quoted it from its source except for this 1960 propaganda pamphlet. If it's the pamphlet I have (I'm not sure because it has no date), it doesn't even quote it directly but from some US pamphlet that is full of racist phrases like "in typical Arab fashion". In any case, how would an alleged resident of Deir Yassin know what the attackers intended? Finally, as if that isn't enough, the Irgun commander was not killed. -- zero 12:11, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

I added a map DeirYassinWiki.jpg which I made out of two old topographic maps and a modern map. I also corrected some distances (not 2km from Kastel but slightly more than 3km in a straight line). Concerning the visibility of the main Tel-Aviv road from Deir Yassin itself, if you examine the map carefully you will see that it was not visible at all except possibly in the distant westerly direction (which is the position I started with in the discussion above). However, portions of the road at 1-2 km distance were visible from points within a few hundred meters of the village. The location of Deir Yassin on the old maps exactly matches that of Kfar Shaul mental hospital, which is on top of the hill and not on the slope. --zero 12:01, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The most biased article I have ever read ANYWHERE on the Wikipedia. This ought to totally deleted, then rewritten without the unhelpful and biased running commentary from the Israeli side. I am absolutely disgusted by the usage of 'cleaning up' in the article to presumably mean killing civilians !!!!!!

[quote]"The loudspeaker truck Before the battle the Irgun had prepared a truck armored with a loudspeaker to warn the villagers of the attack and urge them to flee.

In Sid Zion's essay Deir Yassin: History of a Lie he states that: The first fighter unit to reach Deir Yassin was led by a truck armed with a loudspeaker. An Iraqi-born Jew, fluent in Arabic, called out to inhabitants to leave Deir Yassin via the western exit the attackers had left clear for that purpose. Soon after entering the town, however, the truck was hit by Arab gunfire and careened into a ditch.

The source is unreferenced and it is the only study that claims that the truck actually entered the village. " [/end quote]

So why is it even in here ? Could someone please tell me why it shouldn't be deleted immideately ? Is there any mention of this in Arabic historiography ? Hauser 14:07 4 May 2004 (NZEST)

Sid Zion, again

I've exercised the following sentence from the text:

His testimony has lately been challenged by Sid Zion of the Zionist Organisation of America and other right-wing Jewish organisations.

(regarding Meir Pa'il's testimony). Meir Pa'il was a general and one of the most respected Israeli public figures. His personal integrity is beyond doubt. Sid Zion is an American right wing nobody. These people would say any old thing if they thought that it is congruent with their twisted view of what's in Israel's interests. If they care so much about us, why don't they take their noses out of our business? In short, this sentence gives a false impression as if there is some controversy about Meir Pa'il. There is none. Gadykozma 09:56, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You wanted some evidence...

“Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000.”38 A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there." Sharif Kanaana and Nihad Zitawi, "Deir Yassin," Monograph No. 4, Destroyed Palestinian Villages Documentation Project, (Bir Zeit: Documentation Center of Bir Zeit University, 1987), p. 55.

Contrary to claims from Arab propagandists at the time and some since, no evidence has ever been produced that any women were raped. On the contrary, every villager ever interviewed has denied these allegations. Like many of the claims, this was a deliberate propaganda ploy, but one that backfired. Hazam Nusseibi, who worked for the Palestine Broadcasting Service in 1948, admitted being told by Hussein Khalidi, a Palestinian Arab leader, to fabricate the atrocity claims. Abu Mahmud, a Deir Yassin resident in 1948 told Khalidi "there was no rape," but Khalidi replied, "We have to say this, so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews." Nusseibeh told the BBC 50 years later, "This was our biggest mistake. We did not realize how our people would react. As soon as they heard that women had been raped at Deir Yassin, Palestinians fled in terror." 45"Israel and the Arabs: The 50 Year Conflict," BBC.

According to Irgun leader Menachem Begin, the assault was carried out by 100 members of that organization; other authors say it was as many as 132 men from both groups. Begin stated that a small open truck fitted with a loudspeaker was driven to the entrance of the village before the attack and broadcast a warning to civilians to evacuate the area, which many did. Most writers say the warning was never issued because the truck with the loudspeaker rolled into a ditch before it could broadcast the warning. One of the fighters said, the ditch was filled in and the truck continued on to the village. "One of us called out on the loudspeaker in Arabic, telling the inhabitants to put down their weapons and flee. I don't know if they heard, and I know these appeals had no effect."

Contrary to revisionist histories that the town was filled with peaceful innocents, residents and foreign troops opened fire on the attackers. One fighter described his experience:

My unit stormed and passed the first row of houses. I was among the first to enter the village. There were a few other guys with me, each encouraging the other to advance. At the top of the street I saw a man in khaki clothing running ahead. I thought he was one of ours. I ran after him and told him, "advance to that house." Suddenly he turned around, aimed his rifle and shot. He was an Iraqi soldier. I was hit in the foot.

The battle was ferocious and took several hours. The Irgun suffered 41 casualties, including four dead.

Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle was essentially the same as Begin's. The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report.

At least some of the women who were killed became targets because of men who tried to disguise themselves as women. The Irgun commander reported, for example, that the attackers "found men dressed as women and therefore they began to shoot at women who did not hasten to go down to the place designated for gathering the prisoners." Another story was told by a member of the Haganah who overheard a group of Arabs from Deir Yassin who said "the Jews found out that Arab warriors had disguised themselves as women. The Jews searched the women too. One of the people being checked realized he had been caught, took out a pistol and shot the Jewish commander. His friends, crazed with anger, shot in all directions and killed the Arabs in the area."

And so on, and so on... Mike23

So you have learned how to do copy and paste. Congratulations! Please come back when you have read the original sources cited by this article and so have the basis to make an informed report on it. Here's just one morsel for you: you copied "Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference." Perhaps if you knew that the Red Cross representative wrote "All I could think of was the SS troops I had seen in Athens" you would start to realise that there is a little more to the story than you realise. --Zero 11:52, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Terrorism, definitions, and consistency

Jayjg; when we last got into this, in another artice, you wrote: "(cur) (last) 22:58, Aug 11, 2004 Jayjg (Lebanon - the athletes deaths didn't just happen either, nor were they shot by German police; rather, they were actively killed by the terrorists)"

Now, considering the fact the the 'attacks' on civillians: 'The Jewish forces participating in the battle belonged to two Jewish groups widely considered terrorist- the Irgun (Etzel) and the Lehi (the Stern gang). Both groups were known for their direct, aggressive tactics that included attacks on civilians'. In respect to the changes made today, are these not also terrorist attacks? Why is it that the definition of these groups has to be softened in some way?

Is not any attack on a civillian not a terrorist attack in its very nature?

Is there not a contradiction here? In all due respect lets not gloss over the fact that these two groups were terrorist groups (para-military or not). There can be no dispute about this.

If Palestinian attacks against civillians are classified as terrorism, which I believe they are, then so too has to be the actions of these two groups: Irgun (Etzel) and Stern (Lehi ).

I have not changed the revert back, yet... But I am hoping you will do the right thing. In fact, I think the whole paragraph should be re-worded. I will wait to see how you re-phrase it, if you do, but here are two rough suggestions:

"The Irgun (headed by Menachem Begin) and the Stern Gang (headed by Yitzak Shamir [sp]) attacked Deir Yassin, a village with about 750 Palestinian residents. The village lay outside of the area to be assigned by the United Nations to the Jewish State; it had a peaceful reputation. Deir Yassin was slated for occupation under Plan Dalet. The mainstream Jewish defense force, the Haganah, authorized the irregular terrorist forces of the Irgun and the Stern Gang to perform this takeover, which quickly turned into a massacre."

or

"Between 9 and 11 April 1948, over 100 Arab townspeople were massacred by Jewish terrorist paramilitaries in Deir Yassin near Jerusalem, in the British Mandate of Palestine. These Jewish terrorist paramilitaries were called the Irgun (Etzel) and Stern (Lehi ) gangs, and had been responsible for the killings of other civillians in other terrorist operations."

In any case give it some thought, and let me know, or I will change the paragraph[s] myself. I just wanted you to discuss any changes here before we make more changes to a page that has at best been controversial.

In respect and peace.

Joseph 16:24, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)