ForumGarden

There's few better sources than the people who took part.

I'll see who I can find who had anything to say from the palest side as I do know that there have been some of them who admitted to the facts as I've set them out rather than hold to the propaganda account but right now I'm fairly busy with Pasech coming up and lots of work to get finished first. I may have to hold off on a reply until next week.

To those who will accept it I wish them well over the Fast.

golem wrote: There's few better sources than the people who took part.

I'll see who I can find who had anything to say from the palest side as I do know that there have been some of them who admitted to the facts as I've set them out rather than hold to the propaganda account but right now I'm fairly busy with Pasech coming up and lots of work to get finished first. I may have to hold off on a reply until next week.

To those who will accept it I wish them well over the Fast.


I'm sorry Golem, but I'm having a lot of difficulty squaring your (Uncle's) account with the other evidence I'm seeing.





Evidence such as the report of the Red Cross written the day after, the eye-witness and photographic account of Meir Pa'il as corroborated by Yisrael Galili, the Chief of Staff of Haganah, the reaction of the Jewish Agency and of David Ben Gurion to the internal evidence presented to them etc.





Given that ALL of the sources of doubt I've looked at come from the Israeli side, do you have any independent, verifiable support for this version of the events?





Unfortunately, those that took part sometines have good reason to tell the story differently.

Whilst I don't fast for Lent, I do wish you well with Pasech.







Scrat,





The figure of 254 was given to De Rainier by Raanan, the commander of the Irgun fighters.





He readily admitted later that he'd deliberately inflated the figure to add to the terror factor amongst the Arabs.





Who would stop to count the bodies when told a number. It would appear that the true number was between 93 (the list of individual names given by one of the survivors) and 140.

It’s a matter of total indifference to me if you believe what I post or not.

I KNOW what I post is either from first hand sources who I have very good cause let alone reason to believe or is from (in the case of some later events and conflicts) my own personal experience.

The events at Dier Yassin are precisely as was told to me by my uncle and corroborated by another person who was there. My Uncle was a member of Irgun and took an active role in the attack chalking up two definite kills himself, both of whom he insists were very obviously not ‘locals’ and were armed to the teeth.

Nonetheless I will over the next short period of time see what I can dredge up from other sources that can be seen on the net.

If more people realised the true history of my country and the reality of what has taken place, and why, then there would be far more sympathy for us and a lot more hatred of the acts of the arabs in the region.

I still maintain that the people worst abused by the arabs are the so called palests who have been systematically lied to and used as a mixture of cannon fodder and sacrificial and expendable resources for the creation of propaganda by their own leadership, itself in essence the Jamiat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun.

Now there in the Jamiat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun IS a disgusting collection of thugs, thieves, liars, murderers, and filth.

More ---

Here’s a site that includes links that give credence to my comments and remarks based on what I learned from people who were there.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_indepe ... yassin.php

And another

http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/deiryassin.html

golem wrote: It’s a matter of total indifference to me if you believe what I post or not.

I KNOW what I post is either from first hand sources who I have very good cause let alone reason to believe or is from (in the case of some later events and conflicts) my own personal experience.

The events at Dier Yassin are precisely as was told to me by my uncle and corroborated by another person who was there. My Uncle was a member of Irgun and took an active role in the attack chalking up two definite kills himself, both of whom he insists were very obviously not ‘locals’ and were armed to the teeth.

Nonetheless I will over the next short period of time see what I can dredge up from other sources that can be seen on the net.





Try to see this from my point of view. I'm attempting to understand this and I see a vast chasm between the two stories. Whilst you may KNOW your sources and their reliability I cannot and so must ask for evidence from both sides.



Can you not accept that, from my viewpoint, a member of the Irgun force involved in what the Red Cross have described as an atrocity, that Haganah and the Jewish Agency condemned, that was the cause of a letter of apology from the Jewish leader to the Arabs, MIGHT tailor his account of the event?

Any substantiating evidence you can provide would be appreciated.





golem wrote: If more people realised the true history of my country and the reality of what has taken place, and why, then there would be far more sympathy for us and a lot more hatred of the acts of the arabs in the region.







I assure you, I condemn the acts of violence by the Arabs just as much as I condemn those of the Israelis

golem wrote: If more people realised the true history of my country and the reality of what has taken place, and why, then there would be far more sympathy for us and a lot more hatred of the acts of the arabs in the region.I'm delighted to say that I have permission from the author to post the attached file for discussion.

The content titlepage reads:

SOME DILEMMAS OF ZIONISM

Rabbi David J. Goldberg

The 27th St Paul's Lecture, under the auspices of the London Diocesan Council for Christian-Jewish Understanding, given at St Botolph's Church, Aldgate on November 24,1988.

Attached files 1988 St Paul's Lecture edited for fg.doc (28.8 KB) 

That is as significant as the occasional condemnation of islam by the odd muslim.

Of course there are some people who agonise about their faith, beliefs, sexuality, whatever --- that’s life.

They are as relevant to main stream opinion, especially in this case, as is a fart in a thunderstorm.

golem wrote: That is as significant as the occasional condemnation of islam by the odd muslim.

Of course there are some people who agonise about their faith, beliefs, sexuality, whatever --- that’s life.

They are as relevant to main stream opinion, especially in this case, as is a fart in a thunderstorm.It's an interesting use of"mainstream" there, golem. I contend that the lecture is itself mainstream, and that you are rather adrift from that central position.

The author wrote the piece eighteen years ago, re-read it this week and said it still sadly holds up as a coherent description of the status quo.

As for who he is, http://www.ljs.org/rabbis.php?&id=1 provides a biographic sketch.

Rabbi Dr David J Goldberg OBE (Rabbi Emeritus) was educated at Manchester Grammar School, Oxford University, and Trinity College, Dublin. He received his Rabbinic Ordination from the Leo Baeck College in 1971. A former chairman of the Rabbinic Conference of the Union of Liberal and Progressive Synagogues, and co-chairman of the London Society of Jews and Christians, he has contributed regularly on Jewish and Israeli topics to The Times, The Independent, The Observer and many other major newspapers and journals.

I brought the lecture here particularly for its perspective on Zionism as contrasted with Israel. This paragraph in particular speaks powerfully to me:

So when we come to discuss an issue so loaded with religious, theological, historical and political significance as the State of Israel, it were best to acknowledge from the start that our responses are subjective, and inevitably coloured by centuries of preconditioning. We are not gathering as sensible, dispassionate men and women wishing to dispose as tidily as possible of some little local problem regarding sovereignty in the Balkans, say, or Alsace-Lorraine; but we are coming, both Jew and Christian, as emotionally-committed, partisan advocates, either for or against. And as the passions rise, tempers inflame, and the arguments become more heated, it is disconcerting to recognise the virulence of one's reactions to those with whom one disagrees. If it is a Jewish critic of Israel, he is labelled "a self-hating Jew". If it is a Christian critic, he becomes, "an anti-Semite masquerading as an anti-Zionist". No doubt there are both self-hating Jews and anti-Semites masquerading as anti-Zionists, who have entered the lists of the Middle-East conflict. There are also PR firms, propagandists, journalistic hacks ready to sell their pens to the highest bidder, corrupt academics, venal politicians, fundamentalist Christian sects, messianic Jewish ones, the Jewish lobby, the Arab lobby, - in short, an ambiguously motivated growth industry all centred on the rights and wrongs, the arguments for and against, of a country, no larger than Wales - certainly in its pre-1967 borders - Israel, that is, not Wales!

Scrat wrote: I definitely agree with this. There is a lot of well paid closed minds involved here on both sides. How big a part of the Israeli GDP has to do with the conflict?

Do you get paid Golem?:-2


“chairman of the Rabbinic Conference of the Union of Liberal and Progressive Synagogues”

Says it all.

At least to those who know what is involved with the various Jewish sects.

And no, I don’t get paid – at least not in the unpleasant sarcastic manner that you imply, not any more.

My time when I did was when I was in active service with the IDF, and that is now over is over, though when I was an active member I was, I am pleased to say, VERY active and VERY successful in whatever I was sent to do.

All sadly now many years ago. Never mind. I did my ‘bit’ and certainly left my mark.

But what is it you English say about Old Soldiers? We never die.

golem wrote:

But what is it you English say about Old Soldiers? We never die.


No - but they do tend to ossify :p

golem wrote: “chairman of the Rabbinic Conference of the Union of Liberal and Progressive Synagogues”

Says it all.

At least to those who know what is involved with the various Jewish sects.I had hoped you could avoid saying anything so unhelpful. At least you avoided "End of story".

The distinction in the following paragraph seems so utterly pessimistic - the lack of "peace" as a foreseeable option - that I'm surprised that "damage limitation" is still on his agenda. My own opinion is that removal of the Zionist provisions within the Israeli constitution and legal system, bringing the State into line with international norms, is a long-term alternative, but I accept that I'm both uninformed and clutching at straws.

A realistic effort at damage limitation, rather than pursuit of the elusive chimera called Peace is a worthwhile target for statesmen and politicians to aim for, especially when we know that this time the alternative won't be the destruction of the Temple, or Masada, but nuclear warfare. That, let us be quite clear, is the ultimate weapon Israel will resort to should she feel in danger of being over-run. This time she won't go meekly as sheep to the slaughter. And when such Doomsday scenarios are high on the agenda of her Think Tank analysts, and her military men are planning for the next war - what would be the seventh in less than fifty years of statehood - with an estimated twenty thousand casualties, then one realises how signally Israel has failed to establish herself, or achieve acceptability, in the Middle East. What, one must ask, are the reasons for this?

Right from the start the Jewish people who returned to what had been internationally decided was to be their homeland have tried to establish peaceful relations with their neighbours even after the quite disgraceful behaviour of the Brits and time after time the arabs spurned every offer.

Even at the point of the recognition of Israel by the UN the Arabs were invited to join in what would be a joint venture to make the nascent Israel, despite being reduced in size to a fraction of what had been intended, a prosperous land beneficial to all who lived there and even that was rejected in fact war was dec;ared the day after resolution 181.

Time and again Israel has tried to reach peace with the tribes who were amalgamated by arafat into something called a “Palestinian” people and time and again the offers and attempts have been thrown in our faces and vicious and murderous attacks aimed deliberately against our innocent citizens.

Even recently a Palestinian government that is based on an overt terrorist movement, hammas, has been elected thereby not only reinforcing the statement of hate towards us but actually raising the stakes.

We pulled out of Gaza and the result? The terrorists moved in and now shell us from within the region.

There is a move towards the de-escalation of the situation, it is our security fence. Hopefully that will downscale the attacks and over a period of time let the hatred of the Palests fade with time as they are prevented from attacking us so removing our need to defend ourselves by taking out the terrorists who their own security forces once couldn’t and now won’t do themselves.

Ideas that Zionism is in some way not a basic Jewish tenant are flawed. To any observant Jew Zionism is an absolute act not only of faith but an absolute part of what we are. I am a Zionist through and through and VERY proud of it.

As for any nuclear weapons that we may or may not have, sufficient to say that every Israeli soldier and member of any branch of the IDF has as an absolute belief that Masada shall never be permitted to have to fall again.

If there was ever a chance that Israel WOULD be defeated, whoever was likely to overrun the land had better have a good use for what would mount to 20,330 sq. Km of trinitite, and a further amount that equates to the land area of where they come from.

There is however a solution. The Palests must stop the attacks on us. It really is that simple. We have repeatedly offered peace, the Palests have never offered peace. That must mean something.

Scrat, do you actually know what a Zionist is?

Scrat wrote: A terrorist. Anyone who thinks they have a right to a certain place because some book says they do and use force to take it along with wanton strife, murder, deprivation of their fellow human beings of the basic needs of life and living are nutjob terrorists.

Don't even try to enlighten me. All terrorists, Jewish and Arab need to be strung up for the betterment of humanity.


If you honestly believe that a Zionist is a terrorist then you are very mistaken.

Not wanting to be enlightened --- well that is amazing.

Don’t confuse you with facts eh? Simply leave you to your prejudice based as it is on a fundamental error.

So be it. I guess that the old saying that where ignorance is bliss ‘tis folly to be wise is rather apt in such a case