Talk:Yitzhak Shamir/Archive 1

Archive 1

Criminal offence?

Prior to his imprisonment by the British, was Shamir ever convicted of a criminal offence, or was he just held in administrative detention? PatGallacher 18:57, 2005 July 23 (UTC)

As nobody has answered this may we take it he was convicted? PatGallacher 02:23, 2005 July 29 (UTC)

Why would you think that he was convicted? And why would you put him in the Polish Criminals category? If you make edits like that, you need sources. HKT ^talk 19:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism

Do his activities in Lehi count as terrorism? —Ashley Y 10:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes. He killed innocent civilians. We call that a terrorist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.39.86 (talk) 07:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

no. Lehi only targeted British representives and not civilians. Amoruso 05:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course he was a terrorist. One of the most vicious and radical. His terrorist career should be the subject of a separate section.JohnC (talk) 07:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Folke Bernadotte was a civilian. —Ashley Y 10:13, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The article on the Stern Gang says that it was a radical self-described terrorist group. There's not much room for debate there. Angus McLellan 00:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

"Do his activities in Lehi count as terrorism?" Are you joking?! Lehi (and Irgun) not only targeted British institutions in Palestine, but also killed hundreds of innocent Arab civilians - including women and children - in the name of Zionism and an Israeli state. They weren't sovereign military forces (not that that would make it right as we see with the IDF in the Occupied Territories) but civilian paramilitary groups bent on killing for their state, like Hamas, Al-Aqsa etc. An interesting side note: Lehi under Stern (and when Shamir was a member) contacted Nazi Germany during the war and offered to form an alliance against the British. So Bernadotte saved Jews [from the Nazis] and yet later died at their hands for not being pro-Israel enough, just a few years after his murderers tried to get friendly with dear old Adolf. And while Britain fought Germany, and Germany rounded up Europe's Jews, the Zionist groups like Lehi were too busy killing British soldiers and Palestinian villagers to care. Shamir, like Begin and many others, was a terrorist turned politician. Just like some Palestinians I could name. 86.15.169.220 12:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Lehi was a terrorist organizations whether Pro-Israelis admit it or not. And unfortunately the current Zionist government has adopted the mentality of the Lehi Terrorist Organizations.Randyqs 07:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, why is there nothing about the Lehi on Yitz's page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.21.38.113 (talk) 11:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The unqualified statement that Count Bernadotte was "an obvious agent of the British enemy" is an unmerited slander of the professional integrity of the Swedish diplomatic service and insults the personal integrity of one most respected members of the Swedish royal family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.239.152.174 (talk) 07:27, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't say much of the Wikipedia's imparciality than in Yasser Arafat's wiki the word "terrorism" appears dozens of times and in this one none. Specially when Lehi was called a terrorist organization by the British... and by themselves!--RR (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The Stern Gang and Lehi were regarded as terrorist organisations by militant Jewish organisations. There is no logical reason for questioning whether Shamir should be described as a terrorist.124.197.15.138 (talk) 00:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I want to refer to the King David Hotel Bombing in that, the organisation in question: the Irgun would telephone a warning call to the British Military saying that there was a bomb in the building. There was no intention to kill innocents, it was more politically aimed than violently aimed. If you were going to call it a "Terrorist" organisation, it should be referred to as a "1940s" terrorist organisation, because there is a big difference between terrorism today and terrorism then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nsatech (talk • contribs) 12:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Has anyone found a citation on the UNSC rightfully regarding the Lehi as a terrorist organisation? All I can find is the NY Times referring to the group as a terrorist organisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.236.240 (talk) 14:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Source? hats good enough.Lihaas (talk) 19:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Summarising the comments here, Shamir should be described as a terrorist. The question is how is this to be done.203.184.41.226 (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Reference to Kach

In its entire history as a political party, Kach won one seat in one election. Calling it the main contender for power is bizarre. And what does "ever-emerging" mean?

Kach and Likud

Kach were projected to win 12-20 seats in the 1984 elections, although because of their ban, never materialized, due to Shamir pushing for the ban In revisionist circles, it was clear that the late Rabbi Meir Kahane was a threat to his Premiership and to the helm of the Revisionist camp, of which Shamir was the leader. Thus, it can be siad there was a rivalry between Shamir and Kahane.

Irgun cat

Shamir was in Irgun, according to the article. —Ashley Y 00:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist

this man was a terrorist yet this article attempt to protray him as otherwise, i wonder if he had darker skin or an islamic name would it be so positive

I agree 100%. He was a terrorist and should be named as such. The article refers to him as an underground fighter and as part of an underground Jewish militia to take away from the fact that they were a terrorist group. A terrorist group who targeted many Arab civilians, however it seems (by reading this article) only Arabs are capable of being named terrorists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonezz (talk • contribs) 03:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a moot point, if you read biographies of Palestinian and Jordanian leaders and staff members they dont call them terrorists - although some of them have such pasts.MustangAficionado (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The way I see it, anybody who is known to have carried out terrorist attacks and/or been a prominent member of a known terrorist group should be labelled as such. — Red XIV ^(talk) 06:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

That's because they're not, they're resistance groups. This bastard is a terrorist, all Zionists are. Idontknowanythingok (talk) 20:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Arguments can be made on this point of half of all Israeli and Palestinian authorities. Once again this is a moot point, doesn't add to the article's purpose. MustangAficionado (talk) 00:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no point in calling him a terrorist, although he indeed was one. No matter how much evidence there is, and how many times it is written - some supporter will come along and change it back. Outrageous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.39.86 (talk) 07:53, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please see the Wikipedia policy at WP:LABEL. Hertz1888 (talk) 08:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

May I refer you to the Wikipedia article on "Yasser Arafat". Is it the case that we can label a person a "terrorist" as long as we cite some source? No matter how biased that source might be? Because there are certainly numerous sources who have labeled Shamir a "terrorist", and if needed, these sources can certainly be cited. I fail to see the neutrality or balance in this case. 98.194.39.86 (talk) 09:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:LABEL doesn't say "some source" or "No matter how biased"; it says "widely used by reliable sources" (emphasis added). Also, considering that the topic is under discussion here, consensus should be sought for making the change. Previous discussions here appear to have failed to reach such consensus. Hertz1888 (talk) 09:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I suppose we can next quibble over the definition of "widely used" and/or "reliable sources". I'm assuming that you understood my use of sarcasm in pointing out the difference in the application of this standard. And for the record, a "widely used and reliable source" does not mean that source isn't biased. In fact, I would point to many of our media outlets as examples of widely used, "reliable sources" which are extremely biased. What WP:LABEL says, in no way invalidates my assertion ... all sarcasm aside. Tjp1962 (talk) 10:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Shamir passes away?

Has the former Prime Minister died? GoodDay (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The New York Times says he died today. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anything about it on nytimes.com, nor at haaretz.com, nor is it at Yahoo News. I could have missed it, but in any event, we shouldn't say he died without an actual linked source. I have reverted the report of his death. 6SJ7 (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Also for whatever it's worth, the article on Ehud Olmert briefly said today that he died on a date that has not even arrived yet. It mentioned the death of the Hezbollah leader, so I guess some Israelis are suffering hoax deaths in retaliation. 6SJ7 (talk) 22:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, somebody added his name to the 'death section' of the article 2008. I've reverted the edit at that other article. GoodDay (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I erased Shamir's death on the page as no one can find a reliable source to support this

Nickname

Is it worth mentioning that his (pejorative) nickname was HaDardas (the Smurf)? Poldy Bloom (talk) 17:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Ya you should mention it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.59.75.195 (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Verifiability

During the spate of vandalism after his death thre were some dubious additions that need verification: [1][2] (wrong ref format with 2 refs in 1 tag)[3]/(claimed by IP as "wrong", which is dubious since at least this is verifiable. and if it is 2 different things then we have a conflict, we cant just remove one)

whats impartial of giving a caveat? the article itself says paramilitary NOT terrorist. And this is more vague and dubious [4](Lihaas (talk) 11:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)).

Lehi Renamed

Agree with Lihaas in that there has been a spate of vandalism posted after Shamir's death. I'd like to see a version take shape consistent with that of pre-30/06/2012.

Regarding me omitting that 'Lehi was renamed'. If this was an edit on the Lehi page, then it would be necessary to explain that official name 'Lehi' took place during Sepetember 1940. Being that the article is talking about Yitzhak Shamir, the official naming one month later is not relevant to the article. The reverted version implies that Lehi was renamed and after the 1940 (if you look at the reverted version you will understand). This is just not true and it's misleading.

Hope this clarifies; simply take a look at Lehi to understand the chronology.

Nsatech (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC) nsatech

woops, seperate section. fair enough ;)(Lihaas (talk) 13:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC)).

Birth date

Why does the Knesset website give his DOB as 22 October?

There has been some sever misrepresentation of sources on the Shamir's story, which remains unverified by any reputable source, documents, or witness, that his father was killed by Poles in Belarus during the Nazi occupation. The sources cited only support that Shamir made the claim, but not that Shamir's claim is fact.

The Jan Nowak-Jeziorański article, "A NEED FOR COMPENSATION" in Rzeczpospolita, January 26, 2001 also does not contain the quotation which was attributed to it. Apparently someone here is manufacturing quotes to support a false statement.

I also don't appreciate the fact that someone removed reference to the Treaty of Riga and Shamir's change in citizenship from it with the excuse that it was "vandalism". That is sldo clear from the Treaty of Riga and Shamir's place of birth, and subsequent time in interwar Poland. It isn't vandalism to state the change in citizenship, unless someone else here has a different agenda which is to smear Poles? I also suspect that some Jews have conflated Lithuanians, Belarussians, Russians and Ukrainians when using the term "Pole". This may be their use of the term, but it remains both incorrect and offensive to atribute atrocities committed by these ethnic groups to ethnic Poles simply because from 1920-1939 these ethnic groups lived in parts of interwar Poland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.57.30 (talk) 04:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:OR

Shamir in several RS attributes his father's death to 'Poles'.

This has been objected to as offensive, and in the face of what sources, recalling Shamir's own words, say, someone has composed the alternative:

His father was stoned to death just outside his birthplace in Ruzhany by Belarusians who had been his childhood friends, after he had escaped from a German train transporting Jews to the death camps.[8]

The sentence has been changed, but the source retained and the source says:

:'While reading out loud the names of his family members killed by the Nazis, Shamir disclosed that his father was killed by Polish childhood friends in his own village, after he succeeded in escaping from a German death train. “My father, Shlomo Ysernitzky, who escaped before the train left for a death camp and while seeking shelter among friends in the village where he grew up, they, his friends from childhood, killed him,” Shamir said in a trembling voice.

We have as yet no source clarifying if by Polish friends Shamir was referring to Belarusian-speaking people or Polish-speaking people. The term is ambiguous for the period, referring as it does to the political identity of people in the village under the Treaty of Riga.

The edits overnight are patently violations of WP:OR, and cannot stand. Worse, the WP:OR invention identifies the ethnicity of his murderers, whereas the sources appear to leave margins for allowing that the murderers were just 'Polish' in the political sense. There is no support, further, in the sources.

Adjust however you like, but this editorial rewriting in the face of sources violates fundamental wiki protocols. Nishidani (talk) 05:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I therefore suggest that we restore

His father was stoned to death just outside his birthplace in Ruzhany by friends of his Polish childhood, after he had escaped from a German train transporting Jews to the death camps. His mother and a sister died in the camps and another sister was shot dead.[7] camps. (Jan Nowak-Jezioranski, 'A Need for Compensation,' in Antony Polonsky, Joanna B. Michlic (eds.) The Neighbors Respond: The Controversy Over the Jedwabne Massacre in Poland, Princeton University Press 2004 pp.87-92 p.91 n.3: ‘Yitzhak Shamir . . a Polish-born Israeli politician and statesman whose father was murdered by his former Polish acquaintances during World War 11.( http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/yitzhak-shamir-1915-2012-a-modest-man-an-uninspiring-leader-and-a-genuine-zealot.premium-1.447900) His mother and a sister died in the camps and another sister was shot dead.(http://www.timesofisrael.com/when-shamir-revealed-how-his-parents-and-sisters-were-killed-in-the-holocaust)

Since this is what the sources say. At most, an editorial note, if we have a gentleman's agreement, can gloss 'Polish friends' by noting that the term is ambiguous, referring either to ethnicity or political identity, and we do not know whether his father's murderers were Polish or Belarusian. Or we can, as I have suggested above write 'friends of his Polish childhood', which means 'childhood in (the political reality of Poland)'.Nishidani (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but your Shamir himself never called those who killed his father "Poles". That is the mischaracterization of others in the article in which he is later quoted. Shamir himself never identifies their ethnicity, nor their first language, nor was Shamir himself a witness to the event since he had left Europe at the time. No age is given for Shamir's father, but if his son was already age 5 at the time of the border change in 1920, his father's childhood friends cannot be considered "Polish" either since they would have been Russian or Belarusian in their youths.

The anti-Polish hostility of this commentator needs to be addressed please. No people fought the Nazis longer or harder than the Poles, so before printing such defamation against a whole people, this specific attack needs to be supported by something more that what has been presented. That which has been presented is that Shamir was "Polish-born" which is demonstrably false, since he was born a Russian. Nothing supports that village into which he was born was "Polish" before the Soviet-Polish war of 1920 and the Treaty of Riga, or that his father's childhood friends were "Polish". This was not historically "Poland" but previously the Grand Duchy of Lithuania prior to Russian annexation during the earlier partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The fact remains that this area became Soviet Belarus after September 1939, so calling it "Polish" after the Poles in the area had been deported to Siberia is outrageously shameful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.57.30 (talk) 06:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Insist as much as you like, but do not misrepresent sources. We do not require his ipssissima verba. The context in which he quoted them is given by many reliable sources. In fact the details sometimes vary, but not that he was killed by friends, described varioously as 'from Poland', 'Polish friends', 'Polish neighbours',:-

Thus, Yitzhak Shamir, one of Israel's Polish-born former prime ministers, whose father was murdered by Polish neighbors, could claim that Poles "ingest anti-

Semitism with their mother's milk."Israel Gutman,,Jacek Santorski & Co Agencja Wydawnicza(American Jewish Committee, 2006 p.102.

In an unguarded moment Yitzhak Shamir, whose father was murdered by a Polish

neighbour, once claimed that 'Poles ingest antisemitism with their mother's milk.'Jewish quarterly, Volume 48, Issue 181 - Volume 49, Issue 188, Jewish Literary Trust, 2001 p.35.

Yitzhak Shamir's father was murdered during the war by

childhood friends from Poland,' Forum, Council of Europe 1989, p.48

One interesting variant by an author who closely studied Shamir has a variant on this, while retaining the detail he was killed by 'childhood friends'.

His father, Shlomo, was shot by childhood friends in

Derecyn (Derechyn in the Ukraine?), in eastern Poland, where he had gone in search of a hiding place.' Kati Marton,A death in Jerusalem,, Random House, 1994 p.102.

I've made reasonable suggestions, but you cannot elide what RS say. This has nothing to do with the truth, but reporting their content faithfully.Nishidani (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Jump to: navigation, search

I disagree. This is about reporting the truth.

"Derecyn" cannot be found in post war Poland. The name which has now been given "Derecyn" corresponds most closely to modern Derechin in Belarus: http://data.jewishgen.org/wconnect/wc.dll?jg~jgsys~community~-1942370 (Its Polish spelling is Dereczyn.) Poland's border's did change due to the war in 1939 and those of Belarus grew as a result. That is a historical fact. Those people living in this village after September 1939, those who were not deported to Siberia, lost their Polish citizenship and became citizens of Soviet Belarus. Calling them "Polish" or labeling this village "Eastern Poland" after September 1939 is simply historically false. It became Soviet Belarus, and the its citizens "Belarusians". Polish culture and institutions in this region were systematically destroyed by the Soviets in 1939, and Polish citizens were deported and killed. (See Jan T. Gross, Revolution from Abroad: The Soviet Conquest of Poland's Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia (Princeton University Press; Expanded edition (July 1, 2012)): http://www.amazon.com/Revolution-Abroad-Conquest-Polands-Belorussia/dp/0691096031

It would be much better to refer to a more thorough historical account of the area such as this: http://www.jewishgen.org/yizkor/Derechin/Derechin.html than to repeat gossip, mere speculation or personal anti-Polish hostilities as "fact". A review of the materials on the above site, from first hand witnesses, makes a much better historical reference. The large Jewish populations in the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and its lands resulted from a Polish policy of religious freedom and toleration which even permitted Jews to have their own courts. That tradition of toleration was sorely tested by the events of WWII in Poland and surely some anti-Semitism existed, but on balance there were far more acts of heroism by Poles to save Jews, at great personal risks to the Poles from the Nazis including death, than isolated acts of collaboration. From my travels and research, the worst atrocities in what had been interwar Poland occurred in the East by those who didn't speak Polish as their first language.

However, continuing to repeat clearly false statements, e.g., Shamir was "Polish-born" or that this village was "Polish" before 1920 in the face of the clear historical record that this was the Russian Empire before WWI and the Belarusian SSR after September 1939 can only discredit Wikipedia's credibility. Whether the mischaracterization of this village is due to academic laziness or demonstrable anti-Polish hostility ultimately doesn't change the fact that historical facts are historical facts. It wasn't Poland when the Nazi's invaded and it wasn't Polish before 1920. 76.117.57.30 (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2012 (UTC) There has been some severe misrepresentation of sources on the Shamir's story, which remains unverified by any reputable source, documents, or witness, that his father was killed by Poles in Belarus during the Nazi occupation. The sources cited only support that Shamir made the claim, but not that Shamir's claim is fact.

The Jan Nowak-Jeziorański article, "A NEED FOR COMPENSATION" in Rzeczpospolita, January 26, 2001 also does not contain the quotation which was attributed to it. Apparently someone here is manufacturing quotes to support a false statement.

I also don't appreciate the fact that someone removed reference to the Treaty of Riga and Shamir's change in citizenship from it with the excuse that it was "vandalism". That is also clear from the Treaty of Riga and Shamir's place of birth, and subsequent time in interwar Poland. It isn't vandalism to state the change in citizenship, unless someone else here has a different agenda which is to smear Poles? I also suspect that some Jews have conflated Lithuanians, Belarussians, Russians and Ukrainians when using the term "Pole". This may be their use of the term, but it remains both incorrect and offensive to attribute atrocities committed by these ethnic groups to ethnic Poles simply because from 1920-1939 these ethnic groups lived in parts of interwar Poland. 76.117.57.30 (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Youre vageu statement to reference the Treaty does not show that Shamir got citizenship, that is syntehsis. ffense is not a substitute for synthesis, if there is nothing explicit in the RS sources you are going of oyour way to show a POV. It is also nto POV to mention "naziz" it was the government of Germany/Third Reich at the time. The same way we mention other states/treaties.Lihaas (talk) 07:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Do we need a separate heading for Shamir's anti-Polonism?

I have added more perspective on his claims that all Poles were anti-semites, and his unsupported assertions that "Poles" killed his father.

Perhaps Shamir's hatred of Poles requires its own section and heading? 76.117.57.30 (talk) 16:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Not really because you are adding POV statements. The statement of one author athat poles disagreed is adding the pov to counter hsi statements, it is also irrelevant "however poles savedj ews". In addition to these said edits you need to discuss and get consensus per BRD before readding as you were warned to do. This doesnt show good faith.Lihaas (talk) 06:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Shamir's comments that all Poles became anti-semites from their mother's nurturing is not my POV. It was Shamir's. You deleted that too. It is fair to state that. Yet, somehow we have a reaction section full of people lauding Shamir and you have no problem permitting that POV. You have an agenda here and YOU, Lihass, are neither neutral nor objection in you POV nor your actions. You seek no consensus and simply want to rule the discussion as a tyrant. Too bad. You also persist in attributing a quote to an author which does not appear in the readily available online article. That is dishonest and also unacceptable.

Shamir could invent any story he wanted about how his father died for his own political purposes. We have the right to comment on the lack of supporting evidence for his claims, other than the fact what he himself, who was not in Europe at the time, said. "His story" implies some collusion between Nazis and Poles for the Holocaust which the author which I cited at length objects. You want to cite the same author, who didn't write what you attribute to her. You are a fraud. Apparently, your intent here is further Shamir's legacy by suppressing legitimate criticism of him.

Lastly, if you ask the Germans and Austrians, the Nazis were not the legitimate government of Germany. They were a bunch of thugs and criminals who illegally seized power in Germany and Austria. Apparently, the POV which you are imposing is that "Nazis" were just the government of Germany. History doesn't record it that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.57.30 (talk) 08:26, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Shamir's statement should be there, must have gone in the other stuff by mistake. At any rate your lack of consensus building and edit warring with NPA isntead of waiting for a consensus is not helping your cause and is a further guarantee that you will face some sanction. I have warned you enough. Ive given you the guidelines an d you are ignoring that.

For the record, Shaimr could very well invent a story thats why we put due caveat that they are HIS views. We do not need to synthesise anything to the contrary and there is nothign implicit. the reader tcan decide for themselves. YOUR history/view of the regime either way is fine in your opinion but not WP's.Lihaas (talk) 10:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Restored and reworded.Lihaas (talk) 11:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

A greater variety of sources is needed here to avoid Isreali bias.

37.104.116.16 (talk) 15:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

There appears to be a bias here in favor of the Isreali press with regard to Shamir's youth in Belarus, and later studies in Poland, and somehow conflating Belarusians and Belarus with Poles and Poland. There was a difference in ethnicity and language. I suggest that Polish, Russian, and Belarusian sources be given equal, if not greater, weight since they are closer to the sites in question and will have better access both in proximity and language to first hand sources about these issues.

Shamir was clearly born in Belarus, not Poland, as was his father. Neither of them can be called "Polish born" in Russia, nor were the villagers there "Polish".

Reporting otherwise is clearly rubbish.

37.104.116.16 (talk) 15:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Nishidani editing war

Changes to this article are limited to one per user per day. You are to provide an explanation for every change you make. If you see some minor problem with an article, you are to correct it, not delete.

Murder is a murder even after state pardon. I remembered wrong spelling of the words guerrilla and gorilla. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.51.204 (talk) 17:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

If I read of Jews of whatever political shade being called 'gorillas', I have a right to revert this as violent language (I took it on sight as anti-Semitic and hence vandalistic) not acceptable for this encyclopedia, and as such a kind of edit that can be reverted at sight, whatever IR rule applies. You now tell me you meant 'guerillas'. I had no way of knowing that. I showed you how that information, which is, despite the revert by Averysoda, quite relevant, can be edited in, in my last revert. The information is relevant because it was extremely peculiar to sign the deathj warrant, as Shamir did, that ordered the murder not only one, but two Europeans who, had they not been executed gangland style, would no doubt have been considered Righteous Among the Nations for their efforts to protect Jews from the Holocaust. His Swedish army convoy got an estimated 5,000 Jews out among the 17,000 camp prisoners taken from the camps in early 1945. That figure is in Paul A.Levine,'Attitudes and Actions: Comparing the Response of Mid-Level Bureaucrats to the Holocaust, 'in David Cesarani,Paul A. Levine (eds.) Bystanders to the Holocaust: A Re-evaluation, Routledge, 2014 p.277. He killed a man who saved thousands of Jews, and never in his long career expressed any regret ( Guy Ziv, Why Hawks Become Doves: Shimon Peres and Foreign Policy Change in Israel, SUNY Press, 2014 p.24), and these facts are important for his wiki biography.Nishidani (talk) 14:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You are extremely right and I am happy you understood this important detail I wished to pick up. It is very annoying to certain groups and they try to hide it with transparent excuses from an open encyclopedia, latest user Averysoda. It is important to provide neutral view in these kind of articles so that every reader no matter what their backround is can explore essential facts even in censored environments. To avoid unnecessary edit wars it is also important to provide an explanation for every change you make and add reference. This is where the nasty misunderstandings have a sea to rise.

Anti-Semitic is a nasty word that gets thrown against everyones face who dare to question any opinion of any jew or Israel government. It is a word that shouldn't exist at the 21st century. It is mainly misused to shut up any disagree and used in the same manner as Nazi-card.

Oskar Schindler saved 1100 jews and was later named "Righteous Among the Nations", Bernadotte saved 5000 and got no recognition in Israel nor did Israel government give any apology about his murder until 1995 when Shimon Peres issued a "condemnation of terror, thanks for the rescue of the Jews and regret that Bernadotte was murdered in a terrorist way."

88.112.51.204 (talk) 14:58, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Nishidani, you just read my mind.

88.112.51.204 (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Yitzhak Shamir. 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/20120330205748/http://heritagefl.com/2011/08/15/the-eulogizer-shamir-abutbul-sundlun-pearle/ to http://heritagefl.com/2011/08/15/the-eulogizer-shamir-abutbul-sundlun-pearle/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131005200343/http://www.archives.gov.il/NR/exeres/323559B4-27DF-4393-8C88-EAAB72EE83E6%2Cframeless.htm?NRMODE=Published to http://www.archives.gov.il/NR/exeres/323559B4-27DF-4393-8C88-EAAB72EE83E6%2Cframeless.htm?NRMODE=Published

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Yitzhak Shamir. 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/20120717102152/http://wiez.free.ngo.pl/jedwabne/article/21.html to http://wiez.free.ngo.pl/jedwabne/article/21.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Edits by dynamic IP2600.1001.x

This is a repeating pattern. The IP2600.1001.B100.x editor changes IP every other minute and pushes their POV to articles mostly related to Polish and/or Jewish-related topics. If they use edit summaries, it is often indicating that they are somehow fighting vandalism and/or POV-editing, frequently with arguments "borrowed" from the editors they revert. This is one such example, see revision history. Other recent examples can be seen here (five–six attempts since November 2018) and here (going on for a year).

The editor was in October rangeblocked for one year from the 2600:1001:B000:0:0:0:0:0/42 range for the same kind of disruptive editing, now using the 2600:1001:B100:0:0:0:0:0/42 range. --T*U (talk) 09:22, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

I'll just add that they in-between also use the IP174:225.x range. --T*U (talk) 09:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Nowak-Jezorianski quote

This quotation is excessively long and out of place, and most importantly irrelevant: Shamir left Poland in 1935 so the opinion of a Polish partisan on what happened in Nazi-occupied Poland after 1941 has nothing to do with Shamir’s opinions on the anti-Semitism he experienced from Poles while growing up and as a young man. Cripipper (talk) 12:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)