Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!morrow.stanford.edu!morrow.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: AS.VXF@forsythe.stanford.edu (Vic Filler)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Deir Yassin
Date: 23 Apr 1993 09:11:21 -0700
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 56
Sender: news@morrow.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <1r94f9$ge3@morrow.stanford.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1993Apr19.204243.19392@cs.rit.edu>,
bdm@cs.rit.edu (Brendan D McKay) writes:
>
>I have previously posted quotations by Irgun participants that
>totally destroys Begin's whitewash.  I have no particular desire
>to post it yet again.
>
>Brendan.
>(normally bdm@cs.anu.edu.au)


You apparently think you are some sort of one-man judge and jury who
can declare "total" victory and then sit back and enjoy the
applause.  But you've picked the wrong topic if you think a few
rigged "quotations" can sustain the legend and lie of the Deir
Yassin "massacre."

You have a lot to learn when it comes to historical methodology.
At the most basic level, you should know that there is a big
difference between weighing evidence fairly and merely finding
"quotations" that support your preset opinions.

If you have studied the history of Israel at all you must know that
many of the sources of your "quotations" have an axe to grind, and
therefore you must be very careful about whom you "quote."  For
example, Meir Pa'il, whom you cite, was indeed a general, a scholar,
and a war hero.  But that doesn't mean everything that comes out of
his mouth is gold.  In fact (and here your lack of experience
shows), Pa'il is such a fanatic, embittered leftist that much of his
anti-Israel blathering (forget about anti-Irgun blathering) would be
considered something like treason in non-Israel contexts.  But of
course you don't consider this AT ALL when you find a juicy
"quotation" that you can use to attack Israel.

Benny Morris (of Hashomer Hatzair) represents himself as a "scholar"
when he rehashes the old attacks on the Irgun.  Don't be fooled.
It's just the old Zionist ideological catfight, surfacing as an
attack on the (then-) Likud government.  If you will look closely at
the section on Deir Yassin in his book on the War of Independence,
you will see his "indictment" to be pure hot air.  And this is the
BEST HE CAN DO after decades of digging for any sort of damning
evidence.  Unfortunately for him, because his book parades itself as
"scholarly," he is forced to put footnotes.  So you can clearly see
that his Deir Yassin account is based on nothing.

The Deir Yassin "massacre" never took place as the propagandists
tell it, any more than the Sabra and Shatila "massacres." Do you get
the feeling people like to blame the Jews for "massacres," even if
they have to make them up?  It must sound spicy.  Even some Jews
like to do it, for reasons of their own.

Please, don't confuse any of you Deir Yassin "massacre" stuff
with facts or scholarship.  You should stick to Begin's version
unless you find something serious to contradict it.

Vic
