Talk:Battle of Jenin (2002)/Archive 1

message: I have added a precursors section as nothing happens in a vacuum
Juanita 20:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: precursors

message: I plan to work on this section a bit.  Try to make it read a bit better and clearer.  I will justify my changes here. Juanita 20:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for putting the time in to sort out tedious text, good job! I did a few edits to 1-2 where I thought was a bit too OR, and also retrieved some sourced material that you had removed (although in paraphrase and shortened). You left in the part about 'war crimes' but took out the context, so I re-added it. Ramallite (talk) 13:33, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done a bit of my own. -- Tomhab 23:19, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Battle

message: "This appears to be the only IDF report with such a large body count and came after inflated Palestinian reports of a massacre." : This is not at all a NPoV. 
Can you explain why did you deleted "The same day, an Israeli military source told AFP some 250 Palestinians were killed." ? (so it's not the only IDF report). 
"and came after inflated Palestinian reports of a massacre" : It's just a PoV. There were Palestinian allegations BEFORE and AFTER the 12th. Why do you choose "before" ?
--Marcoo 00:29, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The point was that the western media mass hysteria could have been caused by his mistake. Point was that it wasn't the first report of an inflated estimate. Besides I've diced that whole section up now -- Tomhab 01:17, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPoV

message: This article is biased toward Israel. Robin Hood 1212 22:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, right. If facts contradict theory, so much worse for the facts. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: please give some basis for that accusation and we can work to resolve any problems you may have.Pluke 00:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  One-sided 

message: The section Inflated body counts shows (on April 14) references to reports by the BBC and Australian newpapers that give inflated body counts of 250 and 188. The referenced articles indicate that these numbers come from the IDF, but do not indicate the exact source (like done on April 12, "IDF spokesman Brigadier-General Ron Kitrey reports ...") It is true that IDF reports were inaccurate at the beginning; I guess that they relied on Palestinian estimates, not being able to return to the battlefield and assess the situation themselves. Now I need some help... I think that this perspective should somehow be incorporated into the article, but I don't know the right way to do it. Any suggestions? --Gabi S. 17:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: part of the point of it all is that no-one really knew (or at least publically admitted) that only 50 or so palestinians died, IDF, media or Palestinians. If you leave in the Palestinians' estimates, and say the media said "250 palestinians dead" then it looks like the media were biased and solely relied on either faulty reports. But lets face it, if the IDF and PLO both claim 250+ figures then the over inflation makes mroe sense.... --Tomhab 01:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media reports vs. IDF claims 

message: Only one partisan source for this incident seems suspicious.  When the Urban Legends website [] discussed this incident, they just said that they were reporting that this story had appeared in one newspaper, they were making no claims that it was accurate. PatGallacher 12:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish blood incident 

message: i removed this problematic use of information from the article:
During the same period , hundreds of Palestinians were killed in the occupied territories by israeli soldiers. The UN estimated that 497 Palestinians were killed and 1,447 wounded during the IDF reoccupation of Palestinian areas between 1 March through 7 May and in the immediate aftermath. An estimated 70-80 Palestinians, including approximately 50 civilians, were killed in Nablus. 
end
i'm concerned both with how this nitpicks at the detail of the article and creating bias by adding up to the death toll including the fights but mostly by how it is inserted into the precursors to the battle while it is definately not centered on events of before the battle. Jaakobou 21:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (1) you can add a pre-battle notes if you find something that focuses on pre-battle notes. I don't see how your post emphasized precursors to the battle of jenin. (2) considering that this article covers a blatant libel attempt that failed (see the CNN trasncripts about the mass graves rumors), i don't see how the article is imbalanced. Jaakobou 21:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  precursors to the battle 

message: The battle in the jenin refugee camp wasn't a massacre. A massacre is when someone comes intentionally killing innocent civilians. What Israel did in Jenin was trying to dismantle terrorist activity. israel iontended to minimize civilian casulties. The terrorists hid themselves and their weapons in a refugee camp so they can get Israel to kill refugees so they can get sympathy form the world amd more Palestinians to hate Israel. if Israel wanted to kill the civilians or anted to bomb the terrorists without caring about the civilians then Israel would have just bombed it. I am not saying that bombing the refugee camp would have been the right descision for Israel to make but Israel risk the lives of their soldiers to minimize civilian casulties in Jenin. Jenin was a battle not a massacre. The world condemns Israel when she defends herself. The Purity of Arms, is in the IDF charter and it calls on Israel to minimize its civilian casulties. We should listen to more guys like Walid Shoebat-Dendoi Monday Apiril 23, 2007 10:06 PM
:We have "strong evidence" from many sources, amounting to "undisputable proof" that innocent civilians were deliberately killed. 
:Most graphic of all (and nobody can call it "Palestinian propaganda") may be the "Kurdi Bear" testimony  published in Yediot Aharonot, Israel's most widely circulated tabloid paper, on May 31, 2002. Moshe Nissim, nicknamed "Kurdi Bear", D-9 operator "I had no mercy for anybody. I would erase anyone with the D-9 ...  They were warned by loudspeaker to get out of the house before I come, but I gave no one a chance. I didn't wait. I didn't give one blow, and wait for them to come out. I would just ram the house with full power, to bring it down as fast as possible. ... Many people where inside houses we started to demolish. They would come out of the houses we where working on. I didn't see, with my own eyes, people dying under the blade of the D-9. and I didn't see house falling down on live people. But if there were any, I wouldn't care at all. ... I am sure people died inside these houses." PalestineRemembered 09:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jenin battle wasn't even a massacre 

message: The BBC (and presumably other media sources) appear to be quite wrong about what is in the UN report "Report of the Secretary-General prepared pursuant to General Assembly resolution ES-10/10" at .
The BBC report  quotes the UN as saying "the UN said the overall number of Palestinians killed was 52".
However, examining the report itself we find "By the time of the IDF withdrawal and the lifting of the curfew on 18 April, at least 52 Palestinians ........ were dead" and "Fifty-two Palestinian deaths had been confirmed by the hospital in Jenin by the end of May 2002. IDF also place the death toll at approximately 52".
There is a further problem, since the BBC report is titled "UN says no massacre in Jenin", and I can see nothing of the sort in the report. The UN report refers to "the battle" 6 times and "battle-field" twice, it also refers to "massacre" 7 times. 
I would propose that the BBC has failed to reach Wikipedia: Reliable Source in this particular case, and that quotes from the report should take precedence (in fact, the BBC version should not appear). This would not be un-encyclopaedic, since the BBC's own investigation of its coverage of the area in 2006 showed bias in favour of Israel . PalestineRemembered 16:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC wrongly quotes the UN report