Talk:Dorohoi pogrom

message: Should this be listed under the "Holocaust" category. Although it did take play in the same time frame, I'm quite sure there was no connection to the Final Solution, thus, I'm a bit uncomfortable with this event being labelled as part of the Holocaust.
:Well, it's before the final solution was decided upon, so certainly it's not related directly. However, I think it can be seen as a precursor for the Holocaust in Romania, much like the Kristallnacht. It shows that the killing of Jews in Romania was not just at the hands of Germans, but was done willingly by the Romanians themselves. okedem 08:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Holocaust category

message: If the troops were not rebellious, then at least it should be made clear that:
1. They were not endorsed by the goverment; and
2. That the goverment eventually stepped in and stopped some of the abuse.
To me, an army that takes military action on civilians without specific orders from the state, is being rebellious.
--Thus Spake Anittas 07:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand your point, but I think the wording should make it clear that there was a wider antisemitic policy, and that these actions did not occur in "empty space" - there was context to it, created, largely, by government actions. I'll see what I can suggest later. okedem 07:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; and I also think that many of the Jews from Bessarabia supported the Soviet takeover, so it wasn't all a myth, as the article somehow suggests; although that should have been irrelevant to the Jews of Dorohoi or any other Jewish civilians. --Thus Spake Anittas 09:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebellious 

message: Currently "Various reports speak of attacks on the retreating soldiers by Jews, though their veracity is disputed, and some have been proven to be fabrications." There is then a reference: , though this summary page it links to doesn't support the claim. However, Chapter 3 does seem to talk about the subject:  (some other archive versions weren't completely downloaded and give errors). This exact reference used by the author of this sentence says, on page 18 (17 based on page numbers), "At the same time, the July 10, 1940, issue of the newspaper Curierul israelit included an article pointing out the differences between the Jews from the Old Kingdom and those from the surrendered territories. It also severely criticized the anti-Romanian attitudes of those Jewish citizens who acted against Romanian authorities and troops during the evacuation." The document does not deny that actions against troops occurred. On page 16 (or 15 by page number), it says historian Gheorghe Barbul fabricated a story about two Romanian army officers who did not exist, giving the source as "Mihai Pelin, op.cit., pp. 88-101." There are two previous references to works by Mihai Pelin but it seems to be referring to the second one, which unfortunately does not seem to be available online. The author of the document mistakenly referred to the work's title as "Adevăr şi legendă", when in fact it is Legendă și adevăr. Mihai Pelin was born in 1940 so did not experience any of the events himself; one would have to read his book to see if he offers convincing evidence that the episode was fabricated. It appears the book that supposedly includes a fabrication was published in 1950 (when the 'Cold War' was still going on, the main subject of the book had been executed three years before, and Romania was controlled by a pro-Soviet Communist party). This also means that unlike when the accusation of fabrication was made, many people were alive who had direct experience of the events (though many others had also died or were in Soviet work camps). Any obvious fabrication would have been pointed out. This source does not support the claim that reports were proven to have been falsified.
As pointed out in this same source, and elsewhere such as Wilhelm_Filderman and Ion Antonescu, Jewish people in the main part of Romania were not sent to concentration camps or killed by the military. At Talk:Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina#Attacks_during_withdrawal_after_ultimatum I linked a translation that is actually a letter from Antonescu to Filderman, explaining why he was allowing persecution of Jewish people in the areas occupied by the Soviet Union. If actions taken against Jewish people in those areas were not a result of what happened during the withdrawal, as even Jewish organizations acknowledge in the reference used on this article, it is difficult to explain why Jewish people in the main part of Romania were not persecuted before, during, and after the time when those in Bessarabia were. 50.135.249.113 (talk) 21:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The source says, "Not only the story, but also the two protagonists were entirely fabricated." Again, reading the book in question would certainly help, but Ion Antonescu was married to Maria Antonescu, who was the daughter of "Romanian Army captain Teodor Niculescu and his wife Angela". It's possible the Captain Niculescu mentioned in the source was in fact the father-in-law of Ion Antonescu. As Maria Antonescu was born in 1892, he would have had to be around 70 years old. 2601:600:8500:B2D9:550E:1A12:AF33:E2CF (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased presentation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dorohoi pogrom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090613061634/http://www.inshr-ew.ro/en-index.htm to http://www.inshr-ew.ro/en-index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:31, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified