From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Israel's peace talks with Syria
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:58:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.052227.11867@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:

# In article Er7@news.cso.uiuc.edu, eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes:

# >bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay) writes:

# >>In article 9wB@news.cso.uiuc.edu, eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes:

# >>>Read up on Deir Yassin - it isn't as clear cut of a case of massacre as you
# >>>think - there are several good accounts which contradict your version of the
# >>>story. 

# >>T.p.m's resident Kachist, David Makowsky, just announced a party.

	Actually, this is the first article I have seen in this thread
otherwise I would have responded earlier.

	I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of (or affiliated
with) the Kach party.  I agree with some of their views, but that is
all.

# >>I hope you realise that the best evidence of a massacre comes from 
# >>Haganah sources.  In order to discount it, you need to believe in some
# >>fiendish conspiracy involving the Haganah, the Brits and the Red Cross.

	No conspiracy is necessary.  Just a need for a common effect.  And
it is indeed one of the greatest tragedies that the Hagana does
provide the "best" sources for this.  However, coming from the
Altalena guys, this is not surprising.

# >Not neccesarily a conspiracy - there is no doubt that it was in the Haganah's
# >interest to discredit the Irgun and Lehi.  I've seen several accounts and all
# >of them admit to the fact that there were Arab irregulars stationed in the 
# >village. 
 
# Then you won't mind citing them for us.  While you are at it, you might
# like to look at the accounts by Irgun participants reported in 
# Kurzman: Genesis 1948, Bell: Terror out of Zion and Reid Banks: Torn Country 
# and ponder why these accounts (all of which deny an organised massacre) do 
# NOT claim there were forces in DY except the villagers (except for one 
# "man in the uniform of an Iraqi officer" mentioned in the third account).

	They did not mention it (and just one in an Iraqi uniform would be
unlikely, although it is possible that is all they saw), or they deny
it?  There is a difference!  Perhaps they did not believe people like
you with an agenda would start denying facts they knew (since they
were a part of it) so well to be true?

# You might also like to explain the following extracts from the Irgun's
# own archives (Jabotinsky Archives, Tel Aviv) deposited in the 1950s by
# Irgun members who were at Deir Yassin:

#    "Apart from the military discussion, the Lehi put forward a proposal
#    to liquidate the residents of the village after the conquest, in order
#    to show the Arabs what happens when the IZL [Irgun -bdm] and the Lehi
#    set out together on an operation, and for another main reason --- it
#    would cause a great uproar throughout the land and would be an
#    important turning-point in the course of the battles."
#    [Yehuda Lapidot, senior Irgun officer, reporting on the Irgun-Lehi
#    planning meeting for the attack on Deir Yassin in April 1947.]

	This was a proposal, that given the circumstances is not
surprising.  What is surprising is that this proposal, which
justifyably represented certain feelings, was not carried out, not
even in a failed attempt, would be used by Brendan to try to prove
something other then what kind of hatred existed at the time!

#    "When it comes to prisoners, women, old people and children, there
#    were differences of opinion, but the majority was for the liquidation
#    of all the men in the village and any other force that opposed us,
#    whether it be old people, women or children."
#    [Benzion Cohen, the Irgun commander of the attack.]
 
	What is wrong with firing back at someone out to kill you, whether
they be man, woman, or child?  Not the use of "any other force that
opposed us", and not simply "and anyone else".

#   "We had prisoners, and before the retreat we decided to liquidate them.
#    We also liquidated the wounded, as anyway we could not give them first 
#    aid.  In one place, about eighty Arab prisoners were killed after some
#    of them had opened fire and killed one of the people who came to give
#    them first aid.  Arabs who dressed up as Arab women were also found,
#    and so they started to shoot the women also who did not hurry to the
#    area where the prisoners were concentrated."
#    [Yehoshua Gorodentchik, Irgun officer.]

	Not so nice, but given the conditions and the hatred, not a
massacre.  Only the first two sentences are deserving of any real
condemnation, and they are the only statements that deserve
condemnation from everything Brendan has posted.  Note, however, that
these were after the fact, and should therefore not be associated with
what took place at Deir Yassin.

# Source: Eric Silver, Begin - A Biography, Weiden and Nicolson, ca 1984.
# (Also called "Begin, the Haunted Prophet".)   He also interviewed
# Lapidot.  The Hebrew text of the Irgun testimony can (Silver says)
# be found in Koteret Rashit, 19 Jan 1983.
 
# >           Even if civilians were killed, it is very irresponsible to label
# >this as a massacre.  There is a big difference between soldiers coming in 
# >with the express intent of murdering innocent people and civilians being
# >injured and killed as a result of actual fighting.
 
# Exactly, which is why "massacre" is an apt description.

	This statement of Brendan's clearly shows his agenda.  The
soldiers had no such intent as a whole.  A small minosity may have,
but this is the case in every battle, including the ones the Allies
fought to keep the Japanese out of Australia Brendan.

# >>> Once again, have you ever heard of Gush Etzion?  Sorry, the arguments
# >>>go both ways here.

# >>Arab irregular forces massacred Jewish civilians and disarmed soldiers
# >>at Gush Etzion.  Allowing for the overdramatisation which one would normally
# >>expect, the accounts in good history books are basically correct.  The
# >>only serious misconception is the role of the Arab Legion (Jordanian 
# >>force commanded by British officers).  I have seen accounts claiming that
# >>the Arab Legion conducted the massacre.  However, the few Jewish survivors
# >>say that they owe their lives to the Arab Legion arriving and stopping it.

# >My only point is that uniquely castigating the Jews because of Deir Yassin
# >is ignoring the flip side of the story.  If you argue Deir Yassin, you must
# >also admit to Gush Etzion.  The argument cuts both ways.  
--

David Makowsky
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu