Wikipedia

Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation

Latest comment: 5 hours ago by Scientelensia in topic Infobox
Learn more about this page

Combatting recency bias edit

Latest comment: 8 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

As Super Dromaeosaurus highlights in a previous discussion on this talk page there is a prominent recency bias in the article due to the ongoing 2023 Israel-Hamas War and this bringing new prominence to the discussion of genocide of the Palestinians.

I've gone through some searches to pull the following news and opinion articles which comment on a genocide of the Palestinians (supportive of the allegation or against it) that have been published prior to 2023.

News sources
2000–2010
2010–2015
2015–2020
2020–2023

I plan to gather a better list of academic pieces that have currently not been used in the article over the next week. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

As stated here is a list of academic articles, books, and such that we don't use in the article, most of which occur from before the Israel-Hamas war.
Academic sources
1950–2000
2000–2010
2010–2015
2015–2020
2020–September 2023
October 2023–Present
-- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't think recency bias is unreasonable here considering the current accusation (in this war) is by far the most significant. JDiala (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I also think that it seems reasonable to expand on this article with the reliable sources that you have found. David A (talk) 08:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Throw this one in as well, Yes, it is genocide, April 2024 opinion from Amos Goldberg. Selfstudier (talk) 11:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Valuable image removed? edit

Latest comment: 1 month ago7 comments3 people in discussion

User:Monopoly31121993(2) removed[1] a long-standing photo of Jewish people protesting against the Palestinian genocide in London Bristol, initially without a rationale, then (when reverted) with an edit summary stating that there was not enough room for two images removed the less relevant image which is also highly offensive to most Jews who consider the genocide accusation as blood libel[2] This edit and comment seemed to censor the fact that Israeli policies also face opposition by some Jews. Combined with the fact that Monopoly31121993(2) today tried to brand all those bringing up the accusations of genocide as Hamas supporters[3], I'm apprehensive that this removal may not be to the benefit of Wikipedia.

I wonder how the community views the issue. BTW, I've exhausted my revert quota for today. — kashmīrī TALK 21:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

What a bunch of blatant lies. Total mischaracterization of an image, it's not from London, there is nothing in the source that says this is a protest by jews. Also, you claim that I accused someone of being a Hamas supporter simply because I added a link to an article about decades of Palestinian claims against Israel? Kashmiri, you seem to be blatantly pushing your pro-Palestinian bias. Please refrain from editing pages related to this topic.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 08:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
And btw, the image that you claim (inaccurately) shows Jews in London was replaced with a relevant image of a protester claiming "genocide" was being carried out in Palestine on Oct. 9th immediately after the war began which clearly shows that the "genocide" accusation has been around even before the Israeli invasion. The explanation that I provided was that the replacement image was not relevant to section that it had been posted in previously but was relevant to the section where I had moved it. There was however only space for one image in that section.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 08:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Monopoly31121993(2) couple of questions, what religions wear a kippah? Is 9 after 7 in a chronological sequence? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 09:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Since when is a picture with 1 person wearing a kippah in Bistol translatable into "Jewish people protesting against the Palestinian genocide in London."? This is Wikipedia, we can't decide what we think we are seeing. We have to use the captions that are provided by the reliable source.
As for your other snide comment, "Is 9 after 7 in a chronological sequence?". I have no idea what you are referring to so I can't respond.
I would appreciate it if you kept things civil. Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 09:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Monopoly31121993(2) you seem to be mistaking the comment from Kashmiri describing the image in this discussion with the description provided in the article. So your complaints about a description that does not exist in the article are null and void. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 10:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The question on chronology is in reference to you statement saying that a protest on the 9th is evidence of genocide accusations prior to the 7th, when saying this would make the image better to show in the section discussing the Israeli assault on Gaza after October 7th. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 10:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Simon Sebag Montefiore edit

Latest comment: 6 days ago21 comments5 people in discussion

@Iskandar323: I'm not sure about this removal of Simon Sebag Montefiore's opinion. Yes, he writes pop history. But:

  • He has a PhD in history from Cambridge University
  • He was a visiting professor (of humanities) at University of Buckingham
  • He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature (which admittedly isn't a history credential)
  • On this topic specifically, he has a 2011 book, Jerusalem: The Biography, which:
    • Received enough reviews to be wiki-notable
    • Was a Sunday Times bestseller
    • Won Jewish Book of the Year from the Jewish Book Council
    • Won the Wenjin Book Prize from the National Library of China
    • Has 238 Google scholar cites, including--from my quick check--scholarly citations such as [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
  • Also in the history category, his 2022 book The World: A Family History of Humanity, which:
    • Was a NYT bestseller
    • Was History Book of the Year by The Times (UK)
    • Was Best History Book of the Year by Smithsonian Magazine
    • Was one of the Best Books of the Year by The New Yorker
    • Was one of the Best Books of the Year by The Economist
    • Has "only" 5 Google Scholar cites (not a ton but not nothing considering it's a little over a year old), and all 5 seem like legit scholarship based on a very quick glance: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

So I think he counts as a historian, like a legit historian. Not on the level of Said or Morris, but enough of a historian to make his opinion WP:DUE for inclusion. He's not a genocide scholar, but is that where we draw the line for this article? Levivich (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

On the latter point – ideally, probably? I hear you that his credentials extend a little further than your average pop historian, but he is honestly known as a TV historian, and this really isn't even close to his area of expertise. The quote in question was also somewhat off-topic – this possibly being partially a result of him being a non-expert on the topic. He was saying apartheid yes, but genocide no, but in a generic context without any real specificity to any particular time period or event. This made the statement vague at best in any case. He was saying apartheid yes, but genocide no about violence in the West Bank in 2022 and 2023, which appears to be a bit of an out-of-the-blue and pointless affirmation of a negative, since does anyone even assert that violence in the West Bank in 2022 and 2023 is genocide? (Genuine question. Not sure. Does anyone say it's a slow genocide? Otherwise, it's just knocking down a bizarrely specific strawman.) Iskandar323 (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'd be inclined to inclusion for this one, personally. Selfstudier (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
It is not out of the question that the WB events, taken not in isolation but in toto, add to the genocide narrative.
Israel is Committing Genocide across Palestine:Active Genocide Alert Condemning Ongoing Violence in the West Bank Selfstudier (talk) 17:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I get it. As a starting point, I'm not too fond of the "parade of opinions" approach in this or any article (lots of articles do this). But if we're going to list "X said genocide/not genocide," there ought to be some kind of standard for who gets included. Maybe that standard should be "historians," maybe it should be "historians of the I/P conflict," maybe it should be "genocide scholars." Then there's the other issue, do we include the opinions that all of it is/is not genocide, or some specific acts were/were not genocide, and does it have to be "genocide" or does "genocidal" count, etc. etc. I'm not sure what the best inclusion criteria would be, and don't really have a strongly-held opinion on where to draw the line, other than that there ought to be some objective standard for inclusion, and right now I look at the article and I think, well, on what basis do we exclude Montefiore but include, e.g., Michael Sfard and Stephen Sedley? Levivich (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
If there's a quorum for inclusion, I don't really mind. But yeah, it struck me as an oddly less expert voice amid much more esteemed ones. A bit meh. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I guess if I were to try and formulate inclusion criteria, it would be "notable scholars of I/P conflict" and "notable scholars of genocide", which would exclude all three people I've mentioned. Levivich (talk) 18:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Very much agree on this point, it should be notable academics and scholars, that is those who specialise in the subject who are presented for highlight. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Drawing the line is tricky, not sure about Sfard, for example, he seems well versed in the IP conflict. Selfstudier (talk) 17:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sfard would be most easily resolved by moving him to the legal discourse, imo. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Another way to skin this cat is to go with the only-opinions-reported-in-secondary-sources rule, i.e., we don't cite X for "X said genocide/not genocide", we only cite Y for "X said genocide/not genocide", and so long as Y is an RS, it doesn't matter who X is. In other words: significant opinions are any opinions reported in RS. IMO it would work better if the rule was that you have to have 2 or even 3 Y's for every X. In other words: significant opinions are any opinions reported by multiple RS. And then to go further, we could say the Y has to be a scholar, or an I/P scholar or genocide scholar, or whatever criteria. I'm still not sure where exactly to draw the line but that's another approach to line-drawing. Levivich (talk) 17:26, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
We would need a cut out for publications in relevant journals, as the most extensive and thought out argumentation is likely to be journal articles where the scholars detail their analysis, and these are nearly never covered in secondary RS. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I haven't like analyzed it to actually know one way or the other, but I would guess that these opinions/analyses are covered in secondary RS, specifically when scholars respond to each other. It would create a delay -- people are publishing now responding to things that were published six months or a year ago -- and that delay is a disadvantage when it comes to covering post-Oct 7 stuff. We could have one rule for new stuff (too new to be responded to) and a separate rule for old stuff (old enough to have been responded to by now if it were significant). Levivich (talk) 17:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think material gets temporally sorted by default. Single-sourced opinions and quotes tend to get steadily trimmed down with time, much as weathered limestone. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Indeed, it's the normal development of an article, e.g. from current events sources to newspapers, to a historical event article sourced to history books. Levivich (talk) 18:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I agree its tricky, but one way or another, presumably genocide scholars would get a free pass with just one source - they are the most pertinent voices after all. Sfard, as noted above, is probably indeed more pertinent to the legal discourse section. Same for Stephen Sedley. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
So: experts in I/P, experts in genocide, and experts in human rights law/law of war (I don't think opinions of just any lawyers would be WP:DUE)? I could get on board with that. That would exclude Montefiore but include Sfard. However, I think it would exclude Sedley, who I think is not an expert in human rights/war/international law? Levivich (talk) 18:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
The Sedley material is also almost criminally anecdotal. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Both Montefiore and Sedney are excellent sources (Sedley by the way is an expert on human rights)Nishidani (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'll confess to ignorantly not voyaging beyond the WP page of Sedley for details, so my appraisal is only as partial as that shakey substance, but it appears his expertise is generally of the more domestic legal variety. Montefiore is also a perfectly adequate voice generally speaking; I'm just not sure genocide rulings are really his forte. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
From memory Sedley sat on the European Commission of Human Rights. To my mind he has always been one of the sanest occasional commentators in this area. His anecdote reflects direct observation. Montefiore, like Simon Schama, is a marvellously gifted historian, and someone with expertise on the long story of Jerusalem will not be unfamiliar with genocidal realities, since core events in Jerusalem's history revolve round extreme ethnic violence. While I am often perplexed when both he and Schama comment on recent decades of I/P conflicts - one cannot be scrupulous in documenting Jewish travails over time and then careless in applying the same sensitivity to the tragedies and traumas of Palestinians without dropping one's historical guard against partisanship in a decidedly embarrassing way- my reservations over such lapses in no way permit me to call into question their authority to comment. Nishidani (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Infobox edit

Latest comment: 5 hours ago11 comments4 people in discussion

I am proposing an updated version of the info box. Given this page’s importance and the fact that these pages – Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel and Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russo-Ukrainian War – both have infoboxes, I felt it was important to do so. I have fixed/addresssed many earlier raised concerns:

  • “It also appears to present as fact events/judgements/motives which are highly contested.”: I don’t believe so, but feel free to delete any or reorder them. They are not sourced on this page (Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russo-Ukrainian War) and thus have no need to be here
  • “Who decides what the motives are for a series of unproven accusations?”: Again, feel free to change or delete them. I thought these would be standard etc.
  • “Islamophobia isn't generally regarded as a motive here”: this I disagree with. It may not be the main motive, but it is a secondary one.

Alternatively, I would be happy to remove the motives section altogether and keep the rest. By the way, good figures over a long period are very hard to find. If you can, please insert any relevant info there.

Here are some of my improvements:

  • As with the accepted formula on this page, I have added many attack types. Better, they are sourced.
Palestine genocide allegations
Part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
 
Graffiti in Hebron calling for the gassing of Arabs, alongside a tag for the terrorist group the Jewish Defense League
LocationState of Palestine and Israel
Date1948 – present
TargetPalestinians
Attack type
Allegations of usage of: Collective punishment,[1][2][3] airstrikes (including in refugee camps),[4][5][6] famine,[7][8][9] forced displacement (ethnic cleansing),[10][11][12][13][14][15] looting,[16][17][18] psychological warfare,[19][20][21] rape and sexual violence,[22][23][24] deliberate and systematic infliction of life-threatening conditions by military sieges,[25][26][27][28][29][30] others
Deaths
  • Estimated 10,000+ killed before January 1 2008
  • 6,735 Palestinians killed from January 1 2008 to October 6 2023[31]
  • 22,313+ killed since 7 October 2023[A]
Victims
  • Almost 2 million people displaced within the Gaza Strip from 7 October 2023 to 19 December 2023[33]
  • 1,900,000 internally displaced persons in the Gaza Strip since 7 October 2023[34]
MotiveAllegations of: Anti-Palestinianism, Anti-Arab racism, desire to expand into the West Bank (including the Jordan Valley), Islamophobia, Zionism, settler colonialism
Accused  Israel

Please work constructively and add or remove what you think if you have consensus. If little feedback or amendment is given, I will add this box to the page.

Thank you, From Scientelensia (talk) 17:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't think this page needs an infobox, tbh. Selfstudier (talk) 17:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Why do you think that? I think it provides clarity and information for new viewers and upgrades the status of the article. Scientelensia (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
The question is why do we need one, we managed perfectly well without one till now. It is not for WP editors to make a "case" for genocide via infobox, the accusation is of course disputed and none of that is in the infobox. Selfstudier (talk) 17:54, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
My thoughts for reasons:
  • Improves information, makes it more readily accessible without having to trawl through a page.
  • Provides a summation of the allegations of the article.
  • Other respected articles of the same nature use infoboxes for these reasons
  • (As a lesser point, the page looks good.)
Scientelensia (talk) 18:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I made some tweaks to the infobox to try and improve it, but I'm still not really liking the idea of an infobox on this article (or infoboxes on the other articles you mentioned for that matter). An infobox is for giving readers at-a-glance quick facts about the topic. For a topic like this, I don't think there are any quick facts that can be summed up into short infobox parameters. Almost every parameter is "unsure/needs explanation," e.g. when it started, where it happened, who was targeted, how many died, the methods (attack type), motives, and who's responsible (it's not just Israel). This infobox kind of concatenates everything from everywhere... but not everyone who says there is a genocide of Gazans going on since Oct 7 also thinks that this genocide began in 1948 or includes anyone in the West Bank or in Israel. Similarly, not everyone who says that the 1948 Nakba was a genocide thinks that the 2nd intifada was part of that genocide. One thing I agree with is the title: it should be "Palestinian genocide accusations" because there are more than one accusation of more than one genocide (or of a genocide with more than one set of boundaries or features). It's all very... complex. Levivich (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hard to disagree. Removing the infobox sounds wise. — kashmīrī TALK 18:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
True, thanks for engaging.
  • Just to say that this page is specifically accusations since 1948. It is difficult, but the if what you say is correct (“not everyone who says that the 1948 Nakba was a genocide thinks that the 2nd intifada was part of that genocide”) it does not mean that the date of this uprising did not host other events which could be listed under genocide. Hope I’m explaining myself well. The page for “a genocide of Gazans going on since Oct 7” is different: Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza.
  • Also, I made some important edits, emphasising that these are only allegations. Do you think it is appropriate now? What would you change?
  • If others are complicit, you could always add a complicit section?
  • As for the stats, they are hard to find especially before 2000. Maybe more extensive research is needed.
Scientelensia (talk) 18:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
What do you think about the infobox at The Holocaust, and using an infobox like that one here? (So, radically shorter.) Levivich (talk) 21:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
There the essential facts are well known and not (usually) disputed so it sort of works. Still think here it is just too...messy...for it to work. Selfstudier (talk) 22:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes potentially, or we could simply remove the motives section here. In any case, I believe an infobox is the right way to go. Scientelensia (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Notes

  1. ^ Per the Gaza Health Ministry and Government Information Office.[32]
Sources

  1. ^ "Israel/OPT: Israel must lift illegal and inhumane blockade on Gaza as power plant runs out of fuel". Amnesty International. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  2. ^ "UN chief reiterates Gaza ceasefire call, condemns 'collective punishment' of Palestinians". United Nations. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  3. ^ "Home Demolition as Collective Punishment Palestinians". B’TSELEM. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  4. ^ "Overnight Israeli airstrikes kill scores in Gaza as fears grow of push into Rafah". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  5. ^ "Gaza: UN experts decry bombing of hospitals and schools as crimes against humanity, call for prevention of genocide". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  6. ^ "Israel Gaza war: Hamas says 70 killed in Israeli air strike on camp". BBC News. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  7. ^ "The UN says there's 'full-blown famine' in northern Gaza". Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  8. ^ "'Man-made famine' charge against Israel is backed by mounting body of evidence". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  9. ^ "Jeremy Bowen: Israel denies famine looms in Gaza, but evidence is overwhelming". BBC News. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  10. ^ "Forcible transfer of isolated Palestinian communities and families in Area C under cover of Gaza fighting". B’TSELEM. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  11. ^ "Coercive environments: Israel's Forcible Transfer of Palestinians in the Occupied Territory" (PDF). Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  12. ^ "'War crime': Israel forcibly transfers Palestinian village". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  13. ^ "Israel working to expel civilian population of Gaza, UN expert warns". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  14. ^ Abu-Laban & Bakan 2022, p. 511, "over 80 per cent"; Pappe 2022, p. 128, "Three-quarters of a million Palestinians ... almost 90 per cent"; Khalidi 2020, p. 60, "Some 80 percent ... At least 720,000 ..."; Slater 2020, pp. 81 ("about 750,000"), 83 ("over 80 percent"), and 350 ("It is no longer a matter of serious dispute that in the 1947–48 period—beginning well before the Arab invasion in May 1948—some 700,000 to 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from or fled their villages and homes in Israel in fear of their lives—an entirely justifiable fear, in light of massacres carried out by Zionist forces."); Shenhav 2019, p. 49, "750,000"; Bashir & Goldberg 2018, p. 7, "some 750,000"; Bishara 2017, pp. 138 ("expelled close to 750,000") and 148 n. 21 ("number of the refugees displaced ranged between 700,000 and 900,000"; Bäuml 2017, p. 105, "approximately 750,000"; Cohen 2017, p. 87, "approximately 700,000 ... between half a million and a million"; Manna 2013, pp. 93 ("approximately 750,000") and 99 n. 12 ("Recently, both Palestinian and Israeli scholars seem to agree on this estimate of 700,000–750,000 refugees."); Masalha 2012, pp. 2, "about 90 per cent ... 750,000 refugees"; Wolfe 2012, p. 133, "some three quarters of a million"; Davis 2011, pp. 7 ("more than 750,000") and 237 n. 21 ("Most scholars generally agree with the UN number, which it was somewhere in the vicinity of 750,000"); Lentin 2010, pp. 6 ("at least 80 per cent") and 7 ("more than 700,000"); Ghanim 2009, p. 25, "Around 750,000-900,000"; Kimmerling 2008, p. 280, "700,000 to 900,000"; Morris 2008, p. 407, "some seven hundred thousand"; Sa'di 2007, pp. 297, "at least 780,000 ... more than 80 percent"
  15. ^ "Israel's Occupation: 50 Years of Dispossession". Amnesty International. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  16. ^ Sabbagh-Khoury 2023, pp. 36, 44, 163, 169–177, 183, 186–189, 226–236, 241, 247–251, 256, 265; Sayigh 2023, pp. 281–282; Manna 2022, pp. 49, 83, 152, 169–170, 174–176, 182, 201, 287 n. 2, 316 n. 26; Khalidi 2020, pp. 250 n. 4 and 287 n. 58; Shenhav 2019, p. 49; Confino 2018, pp. 141–143; Masalha 2018, p. 185; Nashef 2018, pp. 95, 143 n. 4, 178–179, and 180 n.8; Lustick & Berkman 2017, p. 41; Rouhana & Sabbagh-Khoury 2017, pp. 396 n. 6 and 413; Natour 2016, p. 94; Fierke 2014, p. 805 n. 17; Masalha 2012, pp. 16, 135–147; Lentin 2010, pp. 31, 70, and 84; Ram 2009, p. 371; Morris 2008, pp. 154–155, 163, and 281; Abu-Lughod 2007, p. 89; Pappe 2006, pp. 91–95, 100, 109, 125, 147, 167–169, 190, 200, 204–211
  17. ^ "How Israeli soldiers are engaged in widespread looting in Gaza". The New Arab. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  18. ^ "'Psychological warfare': Israeli troops go on looting and vandalism spree across Gaza". Middle East Eye. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  19. ^ Hasian Jr. 2020, pp. 101 ("Israeli-sponsored radio messages that were used to 'wage psychological warfare'") and 103 ("Walid Khalidi, who wrote some of the first Palestinian summaries of what happened during the fall of Haifa in 1959, has recently revisited these issues and concluded that the British colluded with the Haganah in ways that made sure that the use of “psychological warfare tactics” would be used in ruthless ways so that the Plan Dalet could be carried out against unarmed civilians who needed to be moved out of these lands."); Slater 2020, p. 81; Cohen 2017, p. 79; Masalha 2012, pp. 2 and 68, "From the territory occupied by the Israelis in 1948, about 90 per cent of the Palestinians were driven out — many by psychological warfare and/or military pressure and a very large number at gunpoint."; Lentin 2010, p. 109; Shlaim 2009, p. 55, "Morris describes the flight of the Palestinians wave after wave, town by town, and village by village. He gives numerous specific examples of psychological warfare, of intimidation, of expulsion by force and of atrocities committed by the armed forces of the infant Jewish state."; Morris 2008, pp. 160 ("To reinforce this “whispering,” or psychological warfare, campaign, Allon’s men distributed fliers, advising those who wished to avoid harm to leave “with their women and children.”") and 332 ("employing 'psychological warfare by means of flyers and ‘treatment’ of civilian inhabitants'"); Sa'di 2007, p. 308, "Morris’s (2004a) research confirms what Palestinians have argued all along; he shows definitively that active expulsion by the Jewish forces, the flight of civilians from the battle zones following the attacks of Jewish forces, psychological warfare, and fear of atrocities and random killing by the advancing Jewish forces were the main causes for the Palestinian refugee problem."; Pappe 2006, pp. 156 ("The UN 'peace' plan had resulted in people being intimidated and terrorised by psychological warfare, heavy shelling of civilian populations, expulsions, seeing relatives being executed, and wives and daughters abused, robbed and in several cases, raped."), 197 ("... from the Chief of Staff, Yigael Yadin: 'Your preparations should include psychological warfare and "treatment" (tipul) of citizens as an integral part of the operation.'"), and 278 n. 27 ("A range of strategies that could only be described as psychological warfare was used by the Jewish forces to terrorize and demoralize the Arab population in a deliberate attempt to provoke a mass exodus. Radio broadcasts in Arabic warned of traitors in the Arabs' midst, describing the Palestinians as having been deserted by their leaders, and accusing Arab militias of committing crimes against Arab civilians. They also spread fears of disease. Another, less subtle, tactic involved the use of loudspeaker trucks. These would be used in the villages and towns to urge the Palestinians to flee before they were all killed, to warn that the Jews were using poison gas and atomic weapons, or to play recorded 'horror sounds' - shrieking and moaning, the wail of sirens, and the clang of fire-alarm bells."); Morris 2004, pp. 129, 168-169 ("Jewish tactics in the battle were designed to stun and quickly overpower opposition; demoralisation was a primary aim. It was deemed just as important to the outcome as the physical destruction of the Arab units. The mortar barrages and the psychological warfare broadcasts and announcements, and the tactics employed by the infantry companies, advancing from house to house, were all geared to this goal. The orders of Carmeli’s 22nd Battalion were ‘to kill every [adult male] Arab encountered’ and to set alight with firebombs ‘all objectives that can be set alight. I am sending you posters in Arabic; disperse on route.’"), 230, 246, 250, 252, 468 ("He also ordered the launching of ‘psychological warfare operations’ and instructed the units ‘to deal with the civilian [populations]’. Yadin did not elaborate but presumably the intention was to frighten civilian communities into flight."), 522 (Israel agreed that 'those of the civilian population who may wish to remain in Al Faluja and ‘Iraq al Manshiya are to be permitted to do so ...' But within days Israel went back on its word. Southern Front’s soldiers mounted a short, sharp, well-orchestrated campaign of low-key violence and psychological warfare designed to intimidate the inhabitants into flight. According to one villager’s recollection, the Jews ‘created a situation of terror, entered the houses and beat the people with rifle butts’.128 Contemporary United Nations and Quakers documents support this description. The UN Mediator, Ralph Bunche, quoting UN observers on the spot, complained that ‘Arab civilians . . . at Al Faluja have been beaten and robbed by Israeli soldiers and . . . there have been some cases of attempted rape’."), and 591 ("If Jewish attack directly and indirectly triggered most of the exodus up to June 1948, a small but significant proportion was due to direct expulsion orders and to psychological warfare ploys (‘whispering propaganda’) designed to intimidate people into flight."); Masalha 2003, pp. 26–27
  20. ^ "'Israel's psychological operation in Gaza". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  21. ^ "Israel's Gaza war adds psychological operations". Associated Press via NBC News. 2009-01-11. Retrieved 2009-02-19.
  22. ^ Sabbagh-Khoury 2023, pp. 185–186; Sayigh 2023, p. 282; Manna 2022, pp. 75-77 ("[p. 75] The Israeli army carried out killings (including massacres), pillaged, and raped in a number of border villages, including Safsaf, Saliha, Jish, Hula, and Sa‘sa‘, on the day the villages were occupied or shortly thereafter."), 202, and 301 nn. 79-81 ("[n. 79] It seems likely that cases of rape during and after the 1948 war were underreported in the historical literature. With time, it becomes more difficult to investigate those events."); Hasian Jr. 2020, p. 84, "Palestinian researchers, archivists, interviewers, and others who help chronicle these events now have transcontinental allies who collect oral histories that are filled with tales of the rape of women and the killing of innocent children during the involuntary transfers of the 1940s."; Natour 2016, p. 94; Khoury 2012, p. 263, "Many stories of massacres, rape, and expulsion are known, and many other stories are still to be revealed: Tantura, Safsaf, Ein al-Zeitun, Sa’sa’, Sha’ab, Kabri, Abou Shousha, Ai’laboun, and so on."; Masalha 2012, pp. 82–84, "[p. 82] The use of rape and other forms of sexual violence by Jewish forces in 1948 as weapons of war and instruments of ethnic cleansing has yet to be studied. In 1948 the rape of Arab women and girls was not a rare or isolated act committed by individual forces, but rather was used deliberately as an instrument to terrorise the civilian population and push people into fleeing their homes."; Knopf-Newman 2011, p. 183; Lentin 2010, p. 31; Ram 2009, p. 373; Morris 2008, pp. 406–407, "The Israelis’ collective memory of fighters characterized by 'purity of arms' is also undermined by the evidence of rapes committed in conquered towns and villages. About a dozen cases—in Jaffa, Acre, and so on—are reported in the available contemporary documentation and, given Arab diffidence about reporting such incidents and the (understandable) silence of the perpetrators, and IDFA censorship of many documents, more, and perhaps many more, cases probably occurred. Arabs appear to have committed few acts of rape."; Humphries & Khalili 2007, pp. 209, 211-213 ("[p. 211-212] As Benny Morris writes, the regular and irregular military forces of the Yishuv had employed rape in 'several dozen cases' (Morris 2004a: 592) and the news of the rape, though subsequently silenced by both perpetrators and victims, spread as quickly as the news of massacres, aided by the fear and horror of the Palestinians and the 'whispering campaign' of the Yishuv military commanders ... these rapes were one of the more devastating components of Hagana assaults and perhaps the primary explanation behind the decision of many of the refugees to flee."), and 223-226; Sa'di 2007, pp. 293 ("On numerous occasions in the execution of Plan D, the Zionist forces expelled people from their towns and villages, committed rape and other acts of violence, massacred civilians, and executed prisoners of war."), 299-300 ("Morris (2004a) reports that there were 'about a dozen' cases of documented rape, often followed by murder. As he notes, 'We have to assume that the dozen cases of rape that were reported . . . are not the whole story. They are just the tip of the iceberg' (Morris, 2004b: 39)."), and 303-304; Slyomovics 2007, pp. 31 ("Morris documents statistics of a dozen cases of rapes and twenty-four instances of massacres as supporting evidence for a pattern") and 33-38 ("[p. 37] It has been a major achievement by historians of 1948 that the conditions and numbers of actual rape and civilian massacre of the Palestinian population are finally recognized."); Pappe 2006, pp. 90, 132, 156, 184, 196, and 208-211 ("[p. 209] David Ben-Gurion seems to have been informed about each case and entered them into his diary. Every few days he has a sub-section: 'Rape Cases'."); Schulz 2003, pp. 28 and 136 ("According to [Kitty] Warnock [Land Before Honor: Palestinian Women in the Occupied Territories, Monthly Review Press 1990], honour was an ingredient in the exodus as fear and concern to save women from being raped was a reason for flight.")
  23. ^ "Israeli soldiers accused of raping 11-year-old". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  24. ^ "Israel/oPt: UN experts appalled by reported human rights violations against Palestinian women and girls". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  25. ^ "Oxfam accuses Israel of 'deliberately' blocking aid to famine-stalked Gaza". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  26. ^ "'Insidious campaign' by Israel is denying lifesaving aid to Gaza says UNRWA chief". United Nations. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  27. ^ "Israel is deliberately starving Palestinians, UN rights expert says". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  28. ^ "In 2022, too, Israel prevented thousands of Palestinians in need of medical care from leaving Gaza for treatment". B’TSELEM. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  29. ^ "Israel: Record-Low in Gaza Medical Permits". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  30. ^ "Aid groups urge attacks on healthcare centres to stop – as it happened". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  31. ^ "Data on casualties". United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Archived from the original on 20 November 2023. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
  32. ^ "Health Ministry In Hamas-run Gaza Says War Death Toll Hits 22,313". Barron's. 3 January 2024. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
  33. ^ Graham-Harrison, Emma; Borger, Julian (19 December 2023). "Palestinian death toll in Gaza nears 20,000 with nearly 2 million people displaced". Archived from the original on 24 December 2023. Retrieved 25 December 2023.
  34. ^ "Israel: Starvation Used as Weapon of War in Gaza". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 4 January 2024.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Palestinian_genocide_accusation&oldid=1222903729"