Talk:Al-Bassa

This Article is Extremely POV

Is it necessary to discuss a patently false implication?

If an article were to state: "The 22nd Amendment to the Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution limits African Americans to two terms as President", how can I "correct" it?

Yes, it is true that Palestinian Citizens of Israel lived under martial law during the period mentioned, just as it is true that Black Presidents are limited to two terms of office. Would such statement perhaps require a bit of rewording?

Martial law in Israel during the period mentioned was imposed in certain geographical areas upon ALL Israelis regardless of ethnicity, just as the 22nd Amendment applies to ALL presidents, regardless of ethnicity. Am I the one only concerned that such statements may have the efect of grossly misleading those who read it?

The statement: "One witness to the expulsion said that it was preceded by soldiers shooting and killing five villagers inside the church, while another said seven villagers were brutally shot and killed by soldiers outside the church" is an extremely inaccurate, unnecessarily biased (how was this alleged shooting any more "brutal" than those fired back?) and very possibly untrue.

I checked the source, and the author himself provides no source.

He merely makes a claim.

How is it that what originated as an absolutely unsourced claim mysteriously transformed itself into a statement of fact? AbdulHornochsmannn (talk) 21:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

The military government selectively operated in Arab population centers and was selectively enforced on Arabs. Everyone understood that the purpose was to control the Arab population and this is amply confirmed by official documents. It might be technically correct that Jews living in those areas were also subject to it, but in practice they could ignore it. This distinction was so universal that almost all historians describe it as a regime under which Arabs lived. Zero^talk 00:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Sources, please? All I'm hearing are sourceless statements either couched in weasel words or even worse, entireley sourceless statements of "fact" with absolutely no evidence to back it up. Not even a weasel word. Couldn't you have at least TRIED to make your the assertion even the slightest air of legitimacy by beginning it with "It is widely believed the military government...(even the term "Military Government" is incorect. There's an ocean of difference between the terms "Military Government" and "Martial Law".

As for the weasel words, where to begin! "Amply confirmed"? "Everyone undertood"? "Might be technically correct"? "The distinction was so universal"? "almost all historians"? Would you be so kind as to name me just a mere half dozen of these "almost all historians" you're referring to?

One final question: The article makes reference to Israelis/Jews "brutally" shooting Palestinians to death. Just how were these particular shots fired at Palestians any more "Brutal" than those shots fired back at the Jews in those hositilities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbdulHornochsmannn (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure that "martial law" is the correct legal phrase, though it is correct by its popular meaning. "Military government" is the standard phrase used by historians writing in English, though a few prefer "military administration". You can easy verify that yourself, but since you asked so nicely:

• Segregation or Integration of the Israeli Arabs: Two Concepts in Mapai, Eyal Kafkafi, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Aug., 1998), pp. 347-367: "In his [Lavon's] view, the continuation of military government over the Arabs was, in fact, intended to keep up the transfer policy" ... "Lavon ridiculed these dreams of transfer and warned his party that it would not be good policy to prolong the military government over the Arabs that had been set up during the War of Independence"
• Crime and legal control: The Israeli Arab population during the military government period (1938-66), Alina Korn, British Journal of Criminology, (2000) 40 574-593. "..restrictions imposed on Arabs..." ... "the Arab population was subjugated to military government" ... "selective application to the Arab population". (etc, etc).
• Settlement of Title in the Galilee; Dowson’s Colonial Guiding Principles, Jeremy Forman, Israel Studies, vol 7 no 3. : "The 'Proposal for Settlement of Title to Land under Military Rule,' was modified in a number of ways before receiving government approval in August 1956. The Prime Minister’s Arab Affairs Advisor recommended making no public mention of the relationship between accelerated settlement activity and the military government."
• Israel's Road to the 1956 War, David Tal, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 28, No. 1. (Feb., 1996), pp. 59-81. "In this period [1948-1956] the government ... placed the Israeli Arabs under military government..."
• The Roots of Peacemaking: The Dynamics of Citizenship in Israel, 1948-93, Yoav Peled and Gershon Shafir, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Aug., 1996), pp. 391-413. "Of the 150,000 Palestinians who had remained in the territory of the State of Israel at the conclusion of the 1948 war, about 60,000 were granted immediate Israeli citizenship. The rest were allowed to apply for it. Until 1966, however, they were ruled by a military administration, "which imposed severe restrictions on their freedom of movement and economic opportunities, and placed them under surveillance and military law" (Medding 1990, 25). The military administration aroused considerable opposition among some Jewish Israelis because it violated the Palestinians' citizenship rights and among others because it was seen as an electoral instrument in the hands of the ruling Labor Party, which repeatedly garnered the largest share of the Palestinian vote. In response to this pressure and to labor shortages that developed in the (Jewish) labor market, many of the restrictive regulations of the military administration were relaxed in the early 1960s. Its formal abolition, however, came only in December 1966 (Jiryis 1976, 31-55; Lustick 1980; Shalev 1992)."
• Local Struggle, National Struggle, Shira Robinson, International Journal of Middle East Studies 35 (2003), 393–416. "From August 1948 through December 1966, a formal military administration governed the daily lives of the country’s remaining Palestinian Arab population, restricting their movement, expression, and employment, and largely isolating them from Jewish Israeli society."

And so on and on. Can you find any similarly eminent sources that the military government had a significant effect on Jews? Zero^talk 02:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. AbdulHornochsmannn (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Me.

I lived there at that time.

Martial law sucks. Curfews suck. Random checkpoints suck. Constant warrantless search and seizure sucks.

Still, sucky as it was, I'm alive.

Eminent enough for you? AbdulHornochsmannn (talk) 07:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Your personal experience is not WP:V and does not constitute an WP:RS. Please provide scholarly sources that support the changes you are trying to introduce. Zero cited some that support his position. Do you have any for yours besides personal anecdotes? Tiamut^talk 10:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

By the way, earlier you indicated that are a "Black man", who could only imagine how a Jew would feel by misrepresentations you have encountered in this article. Above, you say you lived through martial law in Israel. This is part of the reason personal experiences are not a valid source at Wiipedia. Since seemingly, one can say anything about themselves, when editing anonymously. Tiamut^talk 10:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

mistakes

I have been to the village, and heard its history from an elder who witnessed the events of 1948. In May 14th 1948 the village was circled from 3 directions by Israeli forces. The villagers escaped to the north, acrosss the border to Lebanon (and were not deported two weeks later as the article states). There were at least 3 churches and a mosque, and they remain the only buildings still standing in Bassa today. Pelegisrael 13:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The whole truth

What the article fails to mention is that many of these Arab villages close to the border with Lebanon were occupied by ALA fedayeen and other Arab irregular forces from Lebanon, not to mention Lebanese army troops. To portray these villages as all being detached from the conflict until the Hagannah or IDF decided to occupy them and expel peaceful Arab villagers is simply false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.68.95.65 (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Can't find any such source on that subject. Do you have one? Tiamut^talk 22:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

How about trying Wikipedia? The article in the Palestinian Fedayeen pretty much backs up everything Mr./Ms. 205 is asserting. {Please sign your edits. Unsigned text is liable to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbdulHornochsmannn (talk • contribs)

That article does not contain what you claim. Zero^talk 02:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Trisdam Quotes

Hey Tiamut! I added the Tristram quotes to the article ....*before* I knew (or they were) available on the net. Now they just seem far to big; I tried to "hide" them , but I´m not really happy with the result. Shall we just remove them? Make a short summary of what they say? Then just make ref. to the google-page with the inf., like "Trisdam (1865), p.68, p. p.69" What do you think? Huldra (talk) 22:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey you. I'll try to cut them down or paraphrase as we move along here. Question: Is Trisdam another spelling of Tristram? I assumed it was and changed all Trisdam's to Tristram's but if I'm wrong let me know and I'll undo it. Nice to see you again my dear. Sorry for not emailing. I'm quite tied up with this film stuff I'm working on for the next couple of months so the book project I told you about is on hold until then. If you do want to talk and send me a email, let me know by dropping a note on my page because I don't check it unless someone asks me to. Kisses. Tiamut^talk 22:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooopsh, yeah; "Trisdam" is just a misspelling for Henry Baker Tristram. And don´t worry about putting the book-project on hold. Great to see you editing; cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thought so, but thanks for confirming. I'll try to do as much as I can in the next couple of months, but I'll be pretty busy. Great to see you too though as always. take care of your hands and happy editing. Tiamut^talk 23:01, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh PS. if you have any info on Salbit that you have time to add, that would be good. I created it today and if we can fill in some of the blanks using Khalidi, I'll nominate it for a DYK. If you add things even in just point form, I'll make them into prose and do the formatting of the ref and biblio and everything. No pressure though. If we miss DYK, we can always make it quality later on anyway. Much love, Tiamut^talk 23:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear; Khalidi has hardly *anything* on Salbit, I have already added what is in his meagre "history"-part. I will try to check out Morris, and archaeology refs. in the next day or two. And if you tale a look at User:Huldra/Sources, you will see some notes for articles about 1948-villages that should be written. Kafr Saba is really top of the list; a millennium of history there. All the ones I have listed there either have pictures on commons and/or are discussed by Benvenisti and/or Pappe (in addition to Khalidi and Morris). We are not running out of work! Take care, my dear, Huldra (talk) 23:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry hon, I missed your edits there until just a few minutes ago. Thanks for adding what he has. I will try to make Kafr Saba my next new article project, drawing heavily upon your page info of course. We can make that into a DYK quite easily I think given what you already have and how fast I can find and add new stuff. ;) Thanks for continually reminding me of the valuable resource you have there. I'm sorry I'm such a forgetful dunce and keep missing the opportunity to mine the gold mine. Happy editing me dear. Tiamut^talk 23:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, come on, *you* are the one who can "iron" out my language and make it readable! Hmm, Al-Bassa is starting to look ok; we need to get rid off those "hidden" quotes, though. Oh well, I´ll start adding info for our next project, Kafr Saba, take care! Huldra (talk) 23:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll do more work on Al-Bassa tomorrow and the next day. I'll also add whatever I can on Kfar Saba to your subpage. From there, when we're happy with it, we can farm it out to a new article and nom for DYK right away. It will be ready and we won't feel any pressure that way. Your the best Huldra. It takes pebbles from all of us to build these articles and without yours I would be lost. Tiamut^talk 00:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that plan sounds good. There are notes for about 8 new articles on User:Huldra/Sources, I had actually not planned starting any before I had got the other 1948-village-articles in a better shape, but say, once a week or so, we could indulge ourselves and start a new one ;-) Anyway, I think I have done for tonight; the next two days I might be occupied with other things, but then I should be back. Take care, see ya, my dear, Huldra (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Perfect. I'll add what I can over the next two days. We'll decide when to move out after it's been plumped up a little. I'll be busy next week, but if all I have to do is nominate it and keep track of the DYK nom process (after having added everything I can to your sub-page first of course) we might be able to make Kfar Saba a reality by next week. I think I;m going to go to be too. It's 3:30am here (ooof insomnia again) ;) At least it makes me productive. Sweet dreams my dear. Tiamut^talk 00:32, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And to you, too! We are one hour before you, but anyway; good-night and sweet dreams! Huldra (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

More sources

For mining as time permits (anyone feel free):

• Shai, Aron. The Fate of Abandoned Arab Villages in Israel, 1965-1969. History & Memory - Volume 18, Number 2, Fall/Winter 2006, pp. 86-106 (final destruction ca. 1967)
• Grootkerk Gazetteer, p2-3. (Timeline)
• Secular buildings in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: an archaeological ... By Denys Pringle (p116) [1] (crusader period)
• Un partage de seigneurie entre Francs et Mamelouks : les « Casaus de Sur » [2] (Mamluke period)
• Frankish Rural Settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem By Ronnie Ellenblum [3] (crusader period)
• Abassi, Mustafa and Near, Henry(2007)'The General and the Village: The 1948 War and its Aftermath seen from the Sidelines', Israel Affairs,13:1,24-54. (1948 details)
• 1931 census. 479 occupied houses. 868 Muslims, 1076 Christians, 4 Bahais. (Vol 1, p99)
• Katz, Itamar and Kark, Ruth , 'The church and landed property: The greek orthodox patriarchate of Jerusalem', Middle Eastern Studies, 43:3, 383-408. (Christian churches)
• Nafez Abdullah Nazzal, The Zionist Occupation of Western Galilee, 1948, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 3, No. 3. (Spring, 1974), pp. 58-76. (1948 testimony)
• Morris (2004), pages not yet referenced.
• Atallah Mansour, Narrow Gate Churches: The Christian Presence in the Holy Land under Muslim and Jewish Rule (1948 and later)
• War in Palestine, 1948: Strategy and Diplomacy (Israeli History, Politics, and Society) by David Tal (1948 destruction)
• Petersen, Gazeteer (Vol 1, part1, p111) Ayn el-Bassa (I can't read this)
• A book I don't have: Y. Hadda, Society and Folklore in Palestine: A Case Study of Al Bassa Village, Acre, 1987 (Arabic).

Zero^talk 11:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I've stricken the Pringle ref, since I added what was mentioned there. Question though: is Khirbet Kafr Bassa related to al-Bassa as well? I didn't add anything about it since I was not sure. Thanks the refs Zero. Tiamut^talk 11:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Khirbet Kafr Bassa is far to the south. The numbers in Pringle like "1637/2757" (al-Bassa) and "1521/2054" (Kh. K. Bassa) are map coordinates, horizontal first. You can find the second one on the Zichron Zaakov map (sent in email, folder Topographic1939). The first one would be on the Haifa sheet if I had it. Another way to locate sites in Pringle is: add 500/5000 and multiply by 100. Example (Kh. K. Bassa): 1521/2054 plus 500/5000 is 2021/7054, times 100 is 202,100/705,400. Now go to http://amudanan.co.il/ and find that location (the brown numbers in the upper right that change when you move the mouse). A question: is it possible to feed coordinates into that site? I can only see how to search for names. Zero^talk 14:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey Zero. Thans for the very detailed and useful explanation. I was wondering what those numbers were.

About the site ... I checked it out, and I can find no way to enter coords there. Perhaps though, you might ask Ynhockey, since he seems to have more experience with mapping sites dealing with Israel than I do. Good luck. Tiamut^talk 14:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The Muslim "invade", and the Christian Crusades "reclaims"??

Ok, folks; can we please avoid terms like "Muslim invade", and the "Christian Crusades reclaims"? ..just think the opposite; what if I wrote about the "Christian Crusader invasion" and the "Muslim reclaiming"?

Can we find some neutral terms here, please? Huldra (talk) 22:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't all too comfortable with the term "Muslim invasions" either, unfortunately that's the name of the article I was citing. How about we just stick to the one identical word such as "conquer", and use it equally for all parties involved? I can't see how we'd be acting at all POV.

A word I particularly don't like is "massacre". The word "massacre" implies the wrongful killing of innocents. In WWII, did the Allies "massacre" the Nazis? Not quite.

"[W]hat if I wrote about the "Christian Crusader invasion" and the "Muslim reclaiming"? I'd be fine. I don't see any NPOV issue. All three groups were and/or are actively involved in reclaiming land they believe they have right to. The Christian Crusaders, The Zionist Jews, and today the Palestinians. Remember, I'm just using the word "claim" here. All three have equally laid claim at one point or another.

Still, I must say that I truly appreciate the good faith manner you're dealing with this issue, Hudra. AbdulHornochsmannn (talk) 20:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The name of the article is actually Muslim conquests, and not Muslim invasions. Tiamut^talk 10:04, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

It is now. Unfortunately you removed reference to it under that title as well. What is so terribly wrong about explaining how Muslims GOT there in the first place by referring to the Muslim conquests?

You seem to be putting in an incredible amount of effort to make it seem that the Muslim Arabs are native to that village when in fact they are not. The village was a Jewish village PRIOR to it becoming an Arab village. The Arabs depopulated the village of Jews in the 7th century. 174.89.242.93 (talk) 08:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no information in the sources on whether there was continuity of occupation between the Talmudic period and the Arab period. In fact, even the identification of the location as the Talmudic Betzet is speculation. Was this location specifically identified called Betzet in any Jewish sources before 1948? If not, the name Betzet in the lead should be removed. Zero^talk 09:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Adding unsourced, unverifiable material

A new editor has added a bunch of unsourced material to the article and has protested its removal in these edits which I reverted. I would address him directly, but since he finds me to be an "irrelevant person", I'm not actually interested. Perhaps someone else would like to explain? Tiamut^talk 17:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

That was no simple edit. That was a formal RfC you just deleted. RfC's are meant to be made on the article's template, not the talkpage. I will assume good faith and assume you simply didn't notice the enormous "A user has requested comment from other editors for this discussion banner." You happen to be a party to this issue. Removing an RfC concerning an issue you are a direct party to is a direct conflict of interest. Please reinsert the RfC. AbdulHornochsmannn (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The material you added and which Tiamut correctly reverted belongs on the article talk page, not the article itself. There is nothing wrong with requesting an RfC (provided you follow the correct process), but I recommend that you discuss differences here first, before resorting to the more formal stages of dispute resolution, such as RfC. In answer to your earlier question (which you recently deleted), no, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but it is fine to copy references to reliable sources from other Wikipedia articles, as long as they are relevant and support the material you are inserting.

If you look at the (long) contribution records of Zero, Huldra and Tiamut, you will find that they are careful, accurate editors who take the trouble to supply high-quality sources supporting the material they add. There are many, many thousands of incomplete articles on Wikipedia, and you should not blame them if you think important information is misssing from this article. Instead you are free to add such material yourself, but it must be supported by references to reliable sources, otherwise it is likely to be deleted. --NSH001 (talk) 21:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

AbdulHornochsmannn, if you want to actually contribute to the article here is an example. Supposedly a place called "Betzet" is mentioned somewhere in the Talmud. Which Talmud is it, and what does it say there? An explicit page reference would be best. If we can also find a source that argues the Betzet of the Talmud is the same place as the al-Bassa of this article, we can include the information in the article. But we can't do our own speculating. Zero^talk 22:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletions of sourced, relevant material - insertion of POV and remotely related material

• Reverted these edits. Removing well-sourced, relevant information from this article, or altering it to reflect your own personal tae on how it should read, and adding very POV, one-sided summaries of the reasons for the outbreak of the 1948 war, from sources that do not even mention al-Bassa ... well, I'm sorry, but this kind of editing simply will not fly here.
• If Mr. AbulHornochsmann would like to add some background material on the 1948 war here, it should be material that is directly related to al-Bassa and is WP:NPOV. I suggest however, that simply linking to our own articles that discuss these issues in depth would be better practice, since there are hundreds of villages that were depopulated in 1948 and repeating the same bit about 1948 in each of them, in general terms, would be quite tedious. Tiamut^talk 10:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Copying from a source

In the history of this article, and perhaps remaining still is text copied from this source. Fred Talk 13:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

It is not "copied" text. It is text that is paraphrased from that source, and cited to it at the end of every sentence in question (of which there are three currently in the article). If you feel that the paraphrase is too close for comfort, by all means modify it. I tend to stick as closely as possible to the wording in the sources since slight deviations tend to be challenged as POV or OR by people who don't like the info being introduced. Tiamut^talk 16:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Jewish Military Assault and Jewish Expulsion: One cause or two?

Very well, no harm in discussing it.

Can someone please explain to me how a "Miltary Assault" is an entirely separate cause for the depopulation than an outright "Expulsion"? The population was there, and then they left. Why did they leave? According to one source it was because they were expelled by Jews. Fine. How did these Jews manage to gain sufficient control of the village to carry through this expulsion? Military Assault. You can't expell people from a place if you don't control that place. All we're talking about here are two separate stages of one alleged cause.

Q: What was the cause of the Holocaust? A: There was no single cause. Indeed there were seventeen:

Cause 1) The rise of National Socialism in Germany; Cause 2) Adolph Hitler's election to Chancellor in 1933; Cause 3) Adolph Hitler's possession of racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 4) The implementation of Adolph Hitler's racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 5) The construction of Death Camps. Cause 6) The construction of Gas Chambers. Cause 7) The herding of Jews into those Gas Chambers; Cause 8) The introction of the deadly gas "Zyklon B" into those Gas Cambers; Cause 9) The deadly reaction of the Jews to the introduction of Zyklon B into Gas Chambers they happened to have been located in. Cause 10) The cremation of those Jews killed by Zyklon B. Cause 12) Hyper-inflation. Cause 13) The harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 14) German bitterness over the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 15) Mohammad Amin al-Husayni's alliance with Hitler. Cause 16) Al-Husayani's extreme inhospitality in that he refused to so much as allow Jews the most temporary of assylums in Palestine, even if only to save another human's life and kick him out once the war is over. Cause 17) The German need for soap.

But there aren't 17 causes. There is but one: Jew-Hatred.

What would actually be of some USE would be to offer ALTERNATIVE explanations, such as those of Eminent Historian Cecil Roth:

"At the outset the Arab authorities had made it known that any person remaining in the areas controlled by the Jews would be regarded as acquiescing in their political pretentions and would have to answer for it. Thus, with the outbreak of hostilities there took place a wholesale evacuation in preparation for a triumphant return." 70.25.46.99 (talk) 00:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zero0000" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.25.46.99 (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

RFC

Why am I not allowed to make any mention whatsover of the article on the Muslim Conquests to explain the transition from Byzantine to Arab rule? 70.25.46.99 (talk) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for Comment.

{RfC} Why am I not allowed to make any mention whatsover of the article on the Muslim Conquests to explain the transition from Byzantine to Arab rule? 70.25.46.99 (talk) 23:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)