Talk:Palestine

on 18 June 2004 05:41 anonymous user at 67.123.238.3 notes: Bold textNOTE: Disputed article. Accuracy and bias.


 * There is probably no such thing as an undisputed article on this topic. However, who cares?  It is simple and describes accurately the events, including the critical events of 1917-1948.  There's one odd statement:


 * "Jews, Christians, and Muslims all inhabited Jerusalem in relative harmony until "the Crusades" [1] [2], and possibly until the creation of Israel in 1948."


 * It would be better to separate these events - the people of the 11th century were not the people of the 20th century. However in both cases the so-called "Christians" showed up with weapons and agendas that made it impossible to live in peace in the region - and yes the Russians count as Christians too if you want to get picky.


 * There should be mention of the Arab Revolt and Lawrence of Arabia's actions in Palestine. At the time, the entire Arab world east of Egypt did think of itself as one entity, with its capital in Damascus.  That is very clear in all writings of the period:  the objective was to liberate Damascus to form a pan-Arab state that would include everything from Sinai to Persia up to Turk and Kurd country.  The Kurds also came to the Paris 1919 peace conference as did Ho Chi Minh - who was a pastry chef at the time there.  Sadly both were ignored in their pleas for national recognition, and look what resulted!  We are still sorting through the mess that resulted from ignoring them.

what is the point
What is the point of all sketchy, biased and tendentious portrait of Palestine? I am of the opinion it should be axed. PaulR 04:49, 29 Jan 2005 (EST)

I, who started it, think it's a good article; and that the recent edits did a great job of taking off a couple unnecessary edges while retaining the undisputed historical elements.

Somebody might note the results of Israel's use of Preemptive war which resulted in 40 years of hellish misery for everybody and still has no hope for resolution. --Maynard 08:16, 29 Jan 2005 (EST)

pre-emption
Hi the 1967 war was not a preventive war. First, Israelis planned AND trained for this war beginning 1956 (Bowen's book on the Six Day war). So, they waited for a suitable pretext, and the history of the lead up to this war was clearly described by Norman Finkelstein here: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict (second edition)Verso 2003. Chapter 5

Israelis disingenously claim it was a "pre-emptive" war, and this is nonsense. NB: pre-emption is condoned by the UN, aggression is not. Thus this explains the many contortions by the zionists to claim that the war was pre-emptive.

If this page is going to be part of S*, then it better be cleaned up. It is a jumble, poorly written, bad exposition, and rather ill-informed. And who are these VestedOwl clowns? They hardly seem to me as the source of info on this topic.

PaulR 08:27, 29 Jan 2005 (EST)

Palestine population figures
About the 1% figure. David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch, 3rd Edition, p 142: (around 1882): "at that time there were already about 24,000 Jews, mostly immigrants in Palestine.... their numbers were small; in 32 years, by 1914, they -- and their post-Herzl successors -- raised the Jewish propulation to 85,000. As a result of World War I, the total fell to a mere 56,000 in 1918...." Presto, less than one percent.

Certainly it is
You wrote: " precise decade is not"... the point is that before British meddling, there were Palestinian Jews, and they were a minority. There were religious migrants, and these didnt create problems. It was when the zionists started arriving that we encounter problems. It is after the British with the Balfour declaration indicated a green light to the migrants. In 1937 the British crushed a Palestinian revolt in the face of the invading migrants... and then the issue of "which decade" becomes very relevant. Israelis CANNOT claim to be natives of the land. Initially, most of them were of European origin... and that is the crux of the problem in the area. PaulR 11:32, 29 Jan 2005 (EST)

moved from user talk page:

palestine entry
Hi, the palestine entry is pretty crummy (was worse), and i wonder why it should be here at all. what is the point of sourceWatch? I don't think it is to become and encyclopedia -- and this would be a bad entry. I also don't like the VestedOwl as a source: who are these folks. There are so many problems with the page that I would urge a major rewrite, or a total ax. PaulR

Hi Paul, I think that the page as it is does two important things. 1. It presents a clear, concise, and quick synopsis of the history of Palestine, which is fundamental to understanding the whole mid-east and Israeli-Arab enduring conflict; and 2. As I said in that article's talk page, ...
 * Somebody might note the results of Israel's use of Preemptive war which resulted in 40 years of hellish misery for everybody and still has no hope for resolution.--Maynard 08:16, 29 Jan 2005 (EST)

As to relevance for SourceWatch, I'd classify it as a. relevant to democracy and media, but mostly b. useful background material to other SourceWatch articles; and by 'useful' I mean in particular that it presents a quick concise digest of the topic and pointers to more thorough resources.

I'm happly to hear others views on this article and discussion, but I think that they should take place on the talk:Palestine page.

And, Thanks! by the way for taking the effort to fix it up.

--Maynard 10:01, 30 Jan 2005 (EST)

....well, after.... you write: "And, Thanks! by the way for taking the effort to fix it up." Well, you seem to pay more attention to this page now -- after having allowed all sorts of rubbish to accumulate over time in it... And i think the page is fairly useless. Kind rgds PaulR

this is a joke
THIS is the entry on Palestine? A LEVIATHAN of propaganda? This is the entry on the exporter of "Tomorrow's Pioneers"? You MUST be joking. The Hamas formal charter blames Jews for the Russian and French revolutions, and the two world wars. It quotes THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION! Holocaust denial is taught in public schools. "Slaughter the Jews" is heard on podiums; "Push the Jews into sea" became a political mantra. Al Aqsa Television (broadcast throughout the Arab world) reported on IDF operations in Gaza, but not on the fusillade of rockets into Sderot and Ashkelon launched regularly from members of the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in the strip. Statistical manipulation is common-place in all the current political groups in Palestine. And THIS is what you came up with? For shame...

Grokker