Talk:Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine

message: "several shooting attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers"
I wonder is there any source for the claim that the DFLP has attacked civilians during the second Intifada? I'm not particularly aware of this having happened.
"The DFLP conducts occasional guerrilla operations in Southern Lebanon."
Also curious about this - is it perhaps out of date since the Israeli withdrawal?
:Can't find anything to suggest that this information is still accurate so am deleting it.Palmiro 17:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I see the reference to "occupied territories" has been changed to "West Bank and Gaza Strip", separately wikified. I don't think this is a good idea; the occupied territories are effectively a single political/territorial concept and it's not very fair that anyone trying to look them up should have to go to two different entries. Furthermore the West Bank article referred to introduces potential confusion as to whether East Jerusalem is part of the West Bank. In the context of this article (and I suspect most similar articles) it clearly is. I propose to change this to occupied Palestinian territories. It would be both at odds with Wiipedia naming principles (use of common name) and ease of use to do otherwise, in my opinion. The term 'occupied Palestinian territories' is widely used, relatively concise, and refers to an existing article, all of which make it preferable to West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, which is the only unambiguous alternative. 
If the problem is with the name rather than the reference, I'd be perfectly willing to point it at a West Bank and Gaza Strip article if there was one that explained the location and status of the two bits of land together, but as you can see there isn't.Palmiro 11:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Occupied Palestinian territories" provides express support for a particular POV, which one cannot do on Wikipedia.  As well, it means different things to different people; large numbers of people, for example, include Israel in the "Occupied Palestinian territories".  "West Bank and Gaza Strip" is neutral, concise, and exact, and in used even more commonly than "Occupied Palestinian territories".  Thus on all counts it is the preferred usage. Jayjg (talk) 18:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't see the actual West Bank article as muddying the waters in any way; can you explain why you think it does? Jayjg (talk) 06:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Why is that relevant, and why would adding the phrase "Occupied Palestinian territories" make it any clearer?  From what I can tell, considering the 1947 Partition resolution, the "occupied" and "Palestinian" status of East Jerusalem is even more questionable than that of the West Bank. Jayjg (talk) 14:56, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

text: The International Court of Justice's advisory rulings are interesting, though they are just that, advisory opinions. The 1947 partition plan certainly did not envisage East Jerusalem as being part of an Arab state.  In any event, I see no advantage to the single link that is not outweighed by its disadvantages, especially because the links given are so neutral yet informative. Jayjg (talk) 02:03, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

text: I clearly explained above the disadvantages; excess verbiage, ambiguity, and politicization/POV. The 1947 partition plan is certainly relevant to whether or not East Jerusalem is part of the "Palestinian territories".  And finally, who says the ICJ is the authorative judicial instance in questions of international law?  It's just another international body which is attempting to extend its scope and jurisdiction into areas where it has no authority, by claiming it is the authority. Jayjg (talk) 18:01, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Just because a page exists in Wikipedia doesn't mean linking to it isn't expressing a POV, much less introducing excess verbiage and ambiguity.  As for your other suggestion, it would no doubt soon be changed to "Palestinian territories" in order to avoid re-directs.  I've added a link to Palestinian territories in the "See also" section to address your issues. Jayjg (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  West Bank and Gaza Strip 

message: I don't understand you people... The DFLP carried out the Ma'alot massacre, they took explicit responsibility for it! So why can't it be stated clearly in the introductory paragraph, that the DFLP carried out terrorist attacks? It's a fact that can't be disputed. Please read the article and you'll agree that it should be there. The terrorist attacks are also mentioned in the article itself, and were never denied. I don't understand why you keep deleting the sentence "...and military organization, which carried out numerous terrorist attacks". Please explain it to me clearly; I think it must be there. Thanks. --Gabi S. 07:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please have a look at Words_to_avoid#Terrorist.2C_terrorism and WP:NPOV. Please note that no state or international organization (AFAIK) share your view, so stating it as a fact would not add to the Wikipedia's reliability. Furthermore, from a mathematical point of view it can be argued that one incident does not constitute numerous. Bertilvidet 07:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DFLP carried out terrorist attacks 

message: Please read WP:WTA. Note too, that  this discussion ended without concensus on whether such a category was useful or not. In order to include it here, consensus from other editors must be gained. This article is already categorized under . The reason for this is that no one officially classified the DFLP today as a terrorist organization. Indeed, the article explains that its attacks on Israel are limited to military targets within the Green Line. In other words, this is a militant group, but not a terrorist group. Tiamuttalk 15:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008_November_4#Category:Palestinian terrorism ended with keeping that category. As such, arguments related to WP:WTA are irrelevant. The only thing which remains to be determined is if the group, the DFLP, meets the requirements of that category. The DFLP has carried out terrorist attacks, and is officialy designated as a terrorist organization  - and thus meets the category requirements. NoCal100 (talk) 15:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The link you gave is to a press release by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs which calls a DFLP attacker "terrorist". That's not an official designation. Further, DFLP tactics as described in the article focus on militant activities against Israeli military targets within the Green Line (i.e. in the occupied territories) and therefore cannot be considered terrorist, as per international law, an occupied people have the right to resist their occupiers. That the category was retained due to a lack of consensus among Wikipedians as to whether it should or go, does no9t mean we have to use it. We certainly do not have to use it here, where there is very little evidence to suggest that the DFLP is considered to be a terrorist group by anyone other than Israel. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter which is why terrorist is a word to avoid. That is the reigning Wiki policy to date, the only to still enjoy consensus and until that changes, I will resist the inclusion on this category on this page and others. Tiamuttalk 16:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: this category is not :Category:Organizations formerly designated as terrorist, nor is it :Category:Organizations designated as terrorist - it is :Category:Palestinian terrorism. What you are doing is subverting the decision arrived at - which was to keep the new category, and by implication, use it. At the same time, the category :Zionist terrorism was created and populated. I did not participate in the deletion discussion discussion, because I am ok with either deleting both these categories, or keeping them both (and then, of course, using them). If this is a principled stance on your part, I'd be happy to help you remove organizations in both categories. otherwise, it seems like pushing a certian POV, where only one nationality's terrorist organizations are so labeled. NoCal100 (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have never added the :Category:Zionist terrorism or :Category:Jewish terrorism to any article, though I do support them being used if :Category:Palestinian terrorism is to be used. Nor have I seen the other categories added to articles on my watchlist. If I did, I probably would have removed them as well, since as I said (please WP:AGF) "terrorism" is a WP:WTA. In any case, what we are discussing here is this article. The DFLP is not currently designated as a terrorist organization. It is also doubtful that there has ever been consensus regarding its former activities (resistance or terrorism?). Terrorism is a tactic and one used by many people. There is no such thing (in my mind) as "Palestinian terrorism" or "Zionist terrorism". Both Palestinians and Zionists have used terrorist tactics to be sure, but to pair the word terrorism with a nationality or ideology just crosses the line into unnecessary and inaccurate essentialization. That there was no consensus in the debate over the cateory leading to its being kept, does not mean we must use it. We have to discuss its application in each case if others want to use it, but we don't have to agree its use just because it exists. Tiamuttalk 16:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that :Category:Zionist terrorism and :Category:Jewish terrorism should be used if :Category:Palestinian terrorism is to be used - and as a corollary, that if :Category:Palestinian terrorism is being depopulated of its member pages, as you and Ceedjee are apparently doing, so should the categories :Category:Zionist terrorism and :Category:Jewish terrorism. I am really ok with either solution - so long as it is being done in an even handed manner. That is why I ask if you are going to be doing the same for those other categories (Check Irgun, Lehi, List of Irgun attacks during the 1930s, Gush Emunim Underground and others) - as a matter of principle, or if you are only going to be doing it for the Palestinian category. NoCal100 (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not doing it systematically for either. I did it for a couple of articles that appeared on my watchlist. When I noticed you had added the category to both, I checked you contribs to see where else you added it. I removed it from a couple of other articles (but not all of them that you tagged). I'm not really interested in being systematic about it. I prefer editing to categorizing to be honest. I can pledge that I will personally not add any of the categories anywhere and will try to remove those I see, but that won't really solve any problems here, since people will edit-war to get their way with these. That's why I think it's just better to get rid of them altogether. Tiamuttalk 18:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started a discussion about this here, which is where the original categories were proposed and achieved consensus - you should probably take your comments there. I don't know  if you and cedjee are doing this "systematically" or not, and it does not really matter - the end result is that you are depopulating the :Category:Palestinian terrorism category, while leaving :Category:Zionist terrorism intact, which is obviously not neutral. Please demonstrate your good faith by depopulating the  :Category:Zionist terrorism articles I've pointed you to. NoCal100 (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I explained why I removed the cats I did above and why I won't be doing anything systematic about it as well. I noticed from your contribs that you have removed cats of Jewish terrorism and Zionist terrorism from various articles while adding Palestinian terrorism. You seem to like categorizing so I suggest you take it upon yourself to do a systematic removal of all the cats, if you are so inclined. That doesn't change my position about the placing of that category on this page, where I maintain that it is inappropriate and does not reflect what the DFLP is about, and particularly not today. Happy editing. Tiamuttalk 20:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You said you would 'try to remove those I see' - and I've shown you several. You are of course free not to do what you pledged you will do, and people will be free to draw their conclusions about this - whether you are acting out of principled opposition to "xxx terrorism" categories, or are pushing a certain nationalistic POV. I know I've drawn my conclusions, and will edit accordingly. NoCal100 (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see Tiamut "pledging" to do anything in quite the definitive terms that you have suggested. If you wish to discuss the details of the English language again, I am more than willing to do so. In any event you seem to be complaining simply when other editors fail to do what you are suggesting, as if this is some sort of fundamental problem. And while you are here, please comment on content not on the contributor (Is that right? And what's the wiki-link? Where's Jayjg where you need him?)--Nickhh (talk) 23:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Here I am, thanks for asking. I find it hard to believe that people would insist that the group responsible for the Ma'alot massacre and Avivim school bus massacre are not "terrorist". In any event, here's a reliable source: "In 1974 it took responsibility for an especially brutal terrorist attack in Maʿalot, Israel, in which several dozen schoolchildren were taken hostage and a number of them killed, and another raid". Jayjg (talk) 01:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, we do have WP:WTA, and yet, the category exists, and was not deleted at CFD. And I'm sure most of the organizations categorized as under the "Terrorism" categories could also be described as "national liberation" etc. We currently have a situation where categories such as :Category:Palestinian terrorism, :Category:Zionist terrorism, :Category:Nationalist terrorism exist. You disagree with their existence; very well. However, you cannot resolve that disagreement by selectively depopulating one category. Either these categories should exist, in which case they need to be appropriately populated, or they should not exist, in which case they should be dealt with at CFD. Now, what criteria are you using for populating the categories? Jayjg (talk) 02:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I happened to agree with you, that none of these categories should exist. That said, they do, so they cannot be selectively de-populated. If you like, I could propose that they all be deleted at CFD. Jayjg (talk) 02:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think my jaw just hit the ground. Jayjg, we agree?!? How is that possible? ;) Anyway, I'd be happy to participate in a CFD on the issue. If, or when, you do set it up, let me know. I'll be their with bells on. Tiamuttalk 03:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Repeated reinsertion of 

message: In the section "Between Fatah and the rejectionists" it reads the DFLP "acted as a strong supporter of the 1974 Ten Point Program." The words "Ten Point Program" links to a website which might be malicious and I believe should be looked into. LoneWolf1992(talk) 01:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A link might need review 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. 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/20070928121505/http://www.medea.be/?page=2&lang=en&doc=72 to http://www.medea.be/?page=2&lang=en&doc=72
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090828101215/http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/about_dflp/dflp_foundation.htm to http://www.palestine-un.org/plo/doc_one.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928121505/http://www.medea.be/?page=2&lang=en&doc=72 to http://www.badeel.ps/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. 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/20031215210945/http://www.jmcc.org/politics/pna/newpagov03.htm to http://www.jmcc.org/politics/pna/newpagov03.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090828101215/http://www.palestine-un.org/plo/doc_one.html to http://www.palestine-un.org/plo/doc_one.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090828101215/http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/about_dflp/dflp_foundation.htm to http://alhourriah.org/english/
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) 21:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. 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/20110807051829/http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/news_%26_reports/al-badil-list-kicks.htm to http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/news_%26_reports/al-badil-list-kicks.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807051937/http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/statements/democratic-front-for-the-liberation-of-palestine-concludes-its-fifth-general-congress.htm to http://www.dflp-palestine.org/english/statements/democratic-front-for-the-liberation-of-palestine-concludes-its-fifth-general-congress.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) 12:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There are no citations for the claim that DFLP is MLMist. I have never seen anyone claim this with any evidence other than this article, which cites no evidence itself. If there is no evidence, this claim should be removed.2601:642:C481:4640:EDCD:145B:D668:C976 (talk) 03:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marxist-Leninist-Maoist? 

message: In 2023, the DFLP, under Hawatmeh’s leadership, joined the Hamas-led offensive Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against Israel, attacking multiple targets with their paramilitary wing, the National Resistance Brigades. The DFLP admitted to this involvement in their party news, Alhourriah, on October 8th. Solidarityandfreedom (talk) 00:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  In 2023, I’d say the fact that “DFLP partakes in no major operations” is no longer true 

message: Pieter Cleppe wrote on Twitter:
Funds from Sweden's "Left Party"'s aid organization have gone to projects with links to the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), a group that participated in the Hamas terror raid on Israel.
The U.S. (and the EU) should now relist this group as a terrorist organisation, which it was until 1999:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Palestine
Do You know is the "Left Party" called the social democrats or what kind of Marxian party is it, i.e. what is the name today? Kartasto (talk) 05:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pieter Cleppe