Talk:King David Hotel bombing
|
|
An event mentioned in this article is a July 22 selected anniversary
RK. I don't normally get involved in these Arab/Israeli pages, but you've introduced a startling POV to this article.
- "The attack on the hotel was considered retalitation for the "Black Sabbath", massive attack by the British on the Jewish citizens of Palestine. Some 17,000 British soliders took military action against the Jewish populace, and some 2700 Jews were taken to British internment camps. Their weapons were confiscated, and the Jewish populace felt that they were put in a position where they could now be massacred by the Arab populace, which had vowed to exterminate the Jews."
No mention of the fact that this was after a sustained campaign of terrorist incidents. Mintguy
I will intervene no further because I don't want to get involved in this controversy and its edit wars, which is the ONE major aspect of Wikipedia that I detest. Mintguy
I deleted "Some people view this attack as the first use of a car bomb in the Middle East." How on earth could it be the first car bomb when it wasn't a car bomb?
I reverted Leumi's edits for the following reasons:
1. The role of Ben Gurion and the Haganah is well established and no longer controversial. Actually Chaim Weizmann knew in advance about it too. As well as official documentation, there is also the testimony of Moshe Sneh (mentioned in the article). He has confirmed the story given here several times.
2. The story about "We don't take orders from Jews" is pure myth. This was established by a journalist who traced the source backwards to its source.
3. There is no (real) controversy about whether a warning was given. The story told by the person who actually gave the warning is almost compatible with the British version given in the secret police report prepared at the time. The incomcompatibility is the timing. According to the British report, there was not enough time between the warning and the explosion for any realistic chance to evacuate the building. The Irgun version denies this.
-- Zero 09:13, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Care to provide some backing for this Zero?
-Leumi
I have removed the term terrorist from this matter. If the PLO is referred to as "termed as terrorist by Israel and United States" then there is no justification to consider the Irgun terrorist. Consistency between the two must be created, and should there be an agreement to move the terms used in the PLO section to terrorist I will support some use of the term here. Just as a clarification my objection to terming the Irgun terrorist does not extend to the Lehi, which is a completely different kettle of fish, so to speak.
-Leumi
I've said elsewhere that I'd like to ban the word terrorist from every article except Terrorism, so I won't object to that. Concerning the facts of the case, the role of the Haganah is accepted to be more or less what the Irgun have long said it to be. As far as I recall, the account at http://www.etzel.org.il/english/ac09.htm#15 (and continue reading with the link at the end of page) is not disputed except for the single issue of the timing of the warning. If doesn't mention Ben-Gurion specificially, but since B-G effectively controlled the United Resistance and this was a major operation it is completely inconceivable tht he didn't approve of it. The contents of the secret British police report were not revealed until about 1970 and can be found in the book of Bethel. There are some interesting extra details which include some small bombs set off outside the hotel just before the main bomb. There are other sources too, which I will mention here as I come across them. --Zero 10:18, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thankyou, and I have just noted that my wording in my request for sources was probably rather rude. Sorry about that. Your sources seem in order. My apologies.
-Leumi
This article identifies the Emperor of Ethiopia as European royalty. Ethiopia is African, and I don't see anything in the article Haile Selassie that identifies him as European royalty. Does this merit an edit? --Mattroyal 14:30, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Mode of attack
I can't seem to find a reference to it, but was the form of attack a "planted" bomb, as the article says? I seem to remembe reading about a metal barrel filled with explosive (and perhaps with a car tyre or two around it) rolled down a hill). Was this the King David operation, some other Irgun attack, or just my fevered imagination? - John Fader
---
It is not Alfonso VIII, but Alfonso XIII the Spanish monarch in 1931. I'll change it.
[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=King_David_Hotel_bombing&curid=105922&diff=0&oldid=0) Sneaky vandalism or a correction? Mgm|(talk) 12:43, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
Hotel vs. Bombing
Something entirely different: I believe the bombing and the Hotel each deserve a seperate article. Any takers? gidonb 16:18, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Mythology
I tried to recover from some of the damage this article has suffered in the past few months. One example is this:
- Menachem Begin quotes one British official who supposedly refused to evacuate the building, saying: "We don't take orders from the Jews."
It was a propaganda claim that was thoroughly debunked by a journalist. It is staying out. --Zero 15:05, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
---
External Link-
removed external link http://www.etzel.org.il/english/index2.html Attack on the King David Hotel. This is a page of a website dedicated to memory of the Irgun organisation and must be considered highly biased. Matt.