Talk:Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Hamas + Islamic Jihad... + a blog as a source

This line bothers me: " Islamic Jihad has much in common with hummus. They both have an Islamist agenda, they call for the destruction of Israel, they have cooperated in attacks against Israel, they formed as offshoots of Egypt's Islamic Brotherhood, and they receive funds from Iran.[7] " The source is actually a blog... Moreover, Hamas has said numerous times that they don't follow their charter any longer. 29 January 2009

Destruction of Israel

The introduction states Their goal is the destruction of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state. and gives a reference to Interview with the General Secretary of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine: Dr. Fathi Shikaki.

I followed the reference and read the article. Returning to the Wiki article I added a clarification that "the destruction of Israel" refers to the state of Israel and not its people. I think this is an important distinction given that Dr. Fathi Shikaki specifically mentions that Jews are welcome in his desired state of Palestine. While I accept that Palestinian militants are certainly attacking, terrorising and murdering Israelis that doesn't imply a desire for total genocide. More to the point, if the interview with Dr. Fathi Shikaki is given as the source of the Islamic Jihad Movement's goal then it should be taken at face value.

Inquiry: What؟s the Palestinian State to you? And do you believe in a peaceful co-existence with the Israeli Jews?

Shikaki: Our State is Palestine, known throughout history, and is a part of the Arab and Islamic worlds. As for the Jews, they have lived peacefully with us for centuries; even when they were expelled from Europe we received them with open arms and tolerance. They could live among us freely, but not as a political entity.

User:Fipplet didn't appreciate my clarification and reverted the edit. I do not think he is justified in this action and from his Userboxes [This user is a proud Swedish Jew, This user comes from Israel, This user is 17 years old, etc] it seems reasonable to suspect a lack of NPOV. I have repeated my edit.

84.13.164.97 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

What one doctor have said isn't enough. There's nothing official with that. Plus the source isn't reliable WP:RS--Fipplet (talk) 17:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

If you are correct, and I dispute that you are, then the [1] at the end of the sentence doesn't belong there and, in fact, you could as well remove the complete statement of Islamic Jihad's goal as there is no basis for it. Apart from that, if an interview with the General Secretary of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine cannot be taken as representing that same organisation then whose can? 84.13.164.97 (talk) 18:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I agree, it is correct what you say. I take back what I've said so far but I don't think we should include what you wrote in the bracket since it isn't really clear that it is what they want. He, at least, seems to be very hostile against the russian jews. In your scentence it says "As for the Jews, they have lived peacefully with us for centuries" but before that he says "Jewish Russian soldiers, who never, neither he nor his fore fathers, set foot in any inch of Palestine". They are obviously not the same to him. The Russians are Israelis too but are thus not included in "They could live among us freely".

The goal is the destruction of Israel. I wish to make it clear that it is not the people of Israel that they seek to destroy but the political entity. They want a map that says Palestine and not Israel, not a land that is free of Jews. Or at least they do if I take Dr. Shikaki's 2001 words at face value. Given that those words are cited for the goal of destruction, it follows that they should be accepted for the clarification that it is the state and not the people. I added the clarification because the first question I had in mind when I read "the destruction of Israel" was "Do they mean the Jews?". I had to read the interview to establish that that was not what was meant. Please leave the clarification in unless you can prove that Islamic Jihad wants to destroy the Jews in Israel (and I mean as a population not just those unlucky individuals who are the victims of the hostilities) 84.13.164.97 (talk) 18:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

You really didn't respond to what I said. This man makes a distinction between Jews that have lived in "Palestine" for centuries and jews that have immigrated. And I know many palestinian does. "It is our right to defend ourselves against foreigners" (he says foreigners not enemies or something like that). 99% of Israelis are immigrants so it's not at all clear that they don't wan't the destruction of the People of Israel (I don't know if you mean Jews or Jewish Israelis, cause People of Israel can apply to both). When he says they can live among us freely he is talking about the Jews that have lived in "Palestine" not the majority of the Israelis.--Fipplet (talk) 18:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Fipplet, if I didn't respond that's because the point was not what his attitude is to different subsets of Jewish people but what "the destruction of Israel" meant. You were introducing a red herring with talk of Russian Jews. And now, with "It is our right to defend ..." you are doing it again. Defending against attack is not the same as going out and destroying a nation and its people!

You said "99% of Israelis are immigrants so it's not at all clear that they don't wan't the destruction of the People of Israel" yet Dr Shikaki said "As for the Jews, they have lived peacefully with us for centuries; even when they were expelled from Europe we received them with open arms and tolerance." Expelled from Europe they were welcomed with open arms. That means immigrants. It can only mean immigrants, so how is it "not at all clear..."?

Can you provide any proof, anything at all, that Islamic Jihad seeks to exterminate the Jews in Palestine?

Your latest edit does not make the same point that my edit made. The definition of "state" is ambiguous enough that it can be taken to include the people. I deliberately made that distinction explicit. It was, after all, my original concern. Can you make a case for blurring that distinction again? If you cannot then please have the decency to revert to my original edit or leave it intact if I do so. 78.147.251.118 (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC) [previously 84.13.164.97]

"Defending against attack is not the same as going out and destroying a nation and its people!" The thing is that he never said Defending against attack but defending against foreigners which as I see it is they are against all jews that immigrated recently. Those jews that they "received with open arms and tolerance" are the Sephardic jews who immigrated in 1492. I don't know any other jews who were expelled to the land of Israel. They are certanly not immigrants since they have lived in the region for 500 years and is in his eyes a "palestinian jew". It is quite clear hat he isn't talking about the same jews. If he did he wouldn't say foreigners but enemies or terrorist or whatever. "Can you provide any proof, anything at all", that Islamic Jihad seeks to exterminate the Jews in Palestine? I don't have to, cause I have never said that I think it should say that in the article: The state and the people. I just think your proof isn't good enough. And in this case I think it is irrelevant whether they want to kill the jews or not. Their stated purpose is the Destruction of the state of Israel not Destruction of the state of Israel but not the people. The goal is the destruction of the state of Israel. If they would achive that (g-d forbid) then they have reached their goal regardless what happens to the jews. If all are killed then they have still succeded and if they're not then they also have succeded. I think the Jews are irrelevant when we write the goal. I wouldn't object if you write further down that that man says they don't want to kill the jews but don't write it's their goal, cause it isn't. And as I've said it still isn't really clear that they don't want anything bad to the Israeli Jews.--Fipplet (talk) 18:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed that the source doesn't even talk about the destruction of Israel... So please remove it, or find a source where they actually call for the destruction of Israel.. 29 January 2009

Comment

Hello, I know next to nothing about "Palestinian Islamic Jihad", but I do know that the word "terrorist" is almost *never* NPOV. It was claimed that the group refers to itself as a terrorist group. Can this claim be substantiated? Silver Maple

Terrorist/Militant

As Wikipedia lists this organization as a terrorist organization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_organizations) and it is being considered a priority for the Terrorism WikiProject wouldn't it make sense to consider it a terrorist organization to help eliminate within Wikipedia? I will change it to terrorist instead of militant but note that the label of terrorist group is disputed.

Shkaki/Shaqaqi

"...Palestinian Islamic Jihad was formed in the Gaza Strip during the 1970s by Fathi Shaqaqi as a branch of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

Shkaki led the organization for two decades. He was killed in..." I guess that Shkaki and Shaqaqi is the same person. If he is, his name should be spelled the same in this document.

Fixed this.--Yunis 12:00, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Last sentence

I deleted the last sentence, which read

"Critics of Islamic Jihad say that Palestinians in this group have gotten so caught up in their narcissistic rage that they have lost the core value of humanity: the value of human life."

It sounds too much like an author's personal opinion being inserted under the "some people say" cloak. The facts about Palestinian Islamic Jihad are bad enough; let them stand on their own without pop-psych-speak about "narcissistic rage."

Hamas split from it?

I don't think either split from the other. Certainly Hamas did not split from IJP, and if IJP was founded in the 70s as stated here then it can't have split from Hamas, which was founded in 1987. Palmiro | Talk 16:18, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

their logo is quite reminiscent of goatse, is there some category or page for this?

I tend to doubt it.

Although, it is a humorous observation, which I hadn't thought of until now.

BTW, Hamas and PIJ-while being distinct organizations-both trace their roots to the Muslim Brotherhood, which was the first modern pan-Islamic terror organization.

Founded by Hassan al-Banna, who's grandson, IIRC, is Tariq Ramadan, a French Islamist.

71.125.245.60 18:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The Muslim Brotherhood is not a terrorist organisation. Its aims mostly involve the Islamisation of society. And the PIJ is not linked to the Ikhwan (as Hamas is via Sheikh Yassin) - its founder was expelled from their ranks before he founded the PIJ. 124.168.212.74 (talk) 09:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/mideast_unrest
  • In Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement on Sun Jul 16 21:18:01 2006, 404 Not Found
  • In Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement on Mon Jul 17 16:36:45 2006, 404 Not Found
  • In Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement on Thu Jul 27 01:02:09 2006, 404 Not Found

---

maru (talk) contribs 05:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Shia?

I would like a single credible source for the assertion that PIJ is a Shia organisation, which occurs in the opening par and then later on in explaining its links to Hezbollah. To my knowledge it is nothing of the kind, Shia Islam being virtually unknown in historical Palestine.

My name is Maher and I am a journalist who has worked for a decade in Britain, the Middle East and Australia. I am also a Palestinian myself. In all my life I have never seen anyone suggest that PIJ is a Shia organisation.

http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr89.html

"While Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas have important ties to Iran, both remain within the Sunni Islamic tradition, argued Muslih."

Indeed, even the linked info on the ICT's website contains this:

The admiration of the three Palestinian militants for the Islamic revolution in Iran was at that time unique of its kind in the Arab world and among the Islamic Sunni movements. Not only did they consider the Iranian revolution as a model for the Arab world, but they accepted the principle of "the leadership of the men of religion" (vilayet-i-faqih) although it was a Shi'ite concept. Shqaqi was also the first in the Arab Sunni world to write, already in March 1979, a book glorifying Khomeini and the Iranian revolution, which was banned by the Egyptian authorities.

And the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Muslim Brotherhood, from which PIJ traces its origins, are certainly Sunni. Whoever wrote this part of the article needs to explain how they came to such an erroneous conclusion.

(Pending the provision of a source, I have removed the references to PIJ as Shia)

Shqaqi/Shaqaqi/Shkaki etc

Also, while it may be true that Shaqaqi is more 'correct' in terms of Arabic transliteration norms, I think it would be better to use the spelling Fathi Shikaki, as this is the spelling that his brother, the pollster and analyst Khalil Shikaki, uses in English.

Full name

One last thing from me (Maher) for the moment: in the opening line of the article we give the organisation's full title in Arabic as Harakat al-Jihād al-Islāmi al-Filastīni, when in the graphic of their emblem it is clearly legible as Harakat al-Jihād al-Islāmi fī Falastīn, or "the movement of Islamic Jihad in Palestine".

Fair use rationale for Image:Islamicjihadjeep.JPG

Image:Islamicjihadjeep.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

No Source - as the attack was under way

I am removing However, photos taken by the Associated Press as the attack was under way show the letters “TV” written in red on the front of the jeep. as it has not got any linked sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.162.102 (talk) 18:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

NPOV?

"Fathi Shaqaqi led the organization for two decades. He was killed in Malta in October 1995 by an Israel Terrorist. Some people believe the party to be Israel, while others say other Jewish Extremist groups killed him. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad often attempts to carry out attacks against Israeli targets on the anniversary of his death, although the identity of the assassins was never determined."

Grammatically bizarre ("an Israel Terrorist"), refers to hearsay unsupported by citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.136.136 (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)