Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

New content in the lede

The newly added content has a few issues. Issa Nakhle is not a historian. Since he was a representative of the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine his work can be valuable as a primary source but it requires interpretation by secondary ones. Secondary sources are also needed to establish the importance of this fact (assuming it's true) for the topic of this article. Alaexis_¿question? 20:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I am aware of Jewish attacks by Lehi, Irgun and so on against the British in 47, that's well documented, I have not seen much material covering Jewish attacks on Arabs in the same time period, not until after the partition resolution. I would like to see some additional sourcing on that. Selfstudier (talk) 09:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Even if sourced it does not summarize the body. I think the fourth lede paragraph should be rewritten fully to narrate the regional (which might briefly mention these terrorist attacks) and international repercussions of the partition plan as well as its legacy. But that requires an improvement of these aspects to the body. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Regardless of Zionist criticism of Issa Nakhle, author of the Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, chapters 6 and 7, which quote hundreds of reports of terrorist attacks on Palestinian civilians by Zionist terrorists are not in dispute. You have no right to bury that information. The information and the source should stand. The intro of the Wiki article, particularly the last paragraph, before that material was included was terribly biased - a whole paragraph on Arab opposition to the partition of Palestine, followed by the sentence 'Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented' - as if it was all the Arabs' fault, with no mention of the escalating, almost daily Zionist terrorist attacks. MathewMunro (talk) 22:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented My phrase iirc, it is true, is it not? Nor does it imply anything about fault.

Can you provide the page number(s) in the source supporting the statement in the article as just glancing I can only see a lot of material about attacks on the British. Selfstudier (talk) 09:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

'Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented' - why do I have a problem with that phrase being tacked onto the last paragraph of the introduction that was all about Arab hostility to the partition plan, in an introduction that didn't even mention the rising, eventually near daily Zionist terrorist attacks?

I think Chat GPT answered this well:

Prompt: 'Can the word 'subsequently' imply blame or causation when used in propaganda?'

Chat GPT reply: 'Yes, the word "subsequently" can imply blame or causation, particularly when used in propaganda. While "subsequently" typically means "afterward" or "following in time," in certain contexts, especially in propaganda or biased communication, it can be strategically used to create a subtle link between events, implying that one caused the other.

In propaganda, this type of wording can be used to influence perception by:

   Implying causality: By placing one event before another and linking them with "subsequently," a writer or speaker can suggest that the earlier event led to the latter, even if there's no direct evidence for that causal relationship.

   Shifting blame: When used in discussing negative outcomes, it can imply that the earlier event was the reason for the negative consequence, thus assigning blame indirectly.

For example:

   "The country enacted new policies, and the economy subsequently collapsed."

   Here, "subsequently" subtly suggests that the policies caused the economic collapse, even though it may not explicitly state that causation.

In propaganda, this technique manipulates the reader or listener's perception by creating a sequence of events that seem logically connected, even if the connection is questionable or false.'

The sentence 'Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented' is fine, but it belongs after a description of the increasing Zionist terrorist attacks, not after a paragraph about Arab proclamations of opposition to the partitioning of Palestine.

___________

As for not being able to find many references to attacks on Palestinians in the British military reports quoted in chapters 6 and 7 of the Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, you must not have looked for very long. If the Internet Archive copy isn't available, try this site, it has the whole pdf of the first volume available for free download: https://web.archive.org/web/20191121134610/http://aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres5/palproblem.pdf. You might like to skip to printed page 149, pdf page 146:

'2 DECEMBER 1947

Khisas village. 1 Arab civilian shot dead by Jewish Gaffir from Beit Hillel approximately 1200 hours. TJFF Huleh patrols increased. WO 275146 Public Record Office, London'

3 DECEMBER 1947

Jewish retaliation incidents are reported as follows:-

Morning 3 December. Several Arab shops in Harcarmel Street Mashiya Quarter of Jaffa set on fire by Jews.

031500B 14 year old Arab boy shot from passing Jewish taxi in Yazur village MR 131 169 on main road Jaffa�Jerusalem.

03 1630B Arab boy seriously injured by shot fired from Jewish bus passing through A1 Qubab village MR 145 15 1 on main road Jaffa-Jerusalem.

Afternoon 3 December. JSPs passing through Yazur vil�lage MR 13 1169 in a taxi and pick-up fired at British Police who returned fire. No casualty. JSPs were traced to Rehovoth and alleged they had been stoned in village.

WO 275146'

The following is summary of the British military reports from the first half of December 1947 quoted by Issa Nakhle in the Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, only counting the incidents in which Jews/Hebrew speakers/Jewish terrorists were held responsible, and the victims were not Brits or Jews, and you can reasonably presume they were Arabs. The figures I've given are the total for the day, which was sometimes from multiple reports. In cases were the report is ambiguous, I've erred on the side of conservatism, for example, where the report said there were an unknown number of injuries, I've counted that as zero. And these reports almost certainly understate the number of less severe injuries. In addition to this, there was also a lot of arson and bombs targeting Arab homes and businesses that I haven't included in the summary below.

2-Dec: 1-killed; 3-Dec: 4-injured; 4-Dec: 1-injured; 5-Dec: 2-injured; 6-Dec: 6-killed, 10-injured; 11-Dec: 43-killed, 33-injured (3 youth victim's ethnicity not specified, but presumably the Jews who did it weren't throwing bombs at their own kind); 12-Dec: 3-injured; 13-Dec: 18-killed, 104-injured; 14-Dec: 7-injured; 15-Dec: 1-killed, 8-injured, ethnicity of attacker not specified, but presumably Arabs weren't firing randomly at Arab buses.

There were even more reports in the second half of December. And there were far fewer in the months before the Jews won the UN partition vote. MathewMunro (talk) 11:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't care what ChatGPT says and neither should you. So none of that says "hundreds" unless I missed it? And the figures you give above do not support hundreds before the resolution or the frequency increasing "several fold" after the resolution. Also none of this is in the article body so I have removed it for now. Selfstudier (talk) 11:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I did however remove the word subsequently, which does not substantively alter things and which you could have done yourself if that was the concern. Selfstudier (talk) 11:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I said hundreds throughout 1947, ie 1 Jan - 31 Dec. And there were. I'll do a count of them now, but it will probably take several hours. If it turns out more than 100 but less than 200, I'll change it from 'hundreds' to 'more than a hundred', even though it's grammatically fine to use the plural of something whenever there's more than one of it, for example, '1.1 apples'. Just counting the stats posted above, in the first half of December, there were 69 Arabs reported killed by Jews. The subsequent "civil war" (which was really just an escalation of the Zionist terrorist ethnic cleansing that was already underway) had more to do with the pre-existing and escalating Zionist terrorist attacks than any Arab proclamations of determination to not permit the partitioning of Palestine. MathewMunro (talk) 11:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

It's my understanding that there were quite a number of Arab attacks after the resolution, perhaps in response to Jewish attacks (and vice versa?). See List of killings and massacres in Mandatory Palestine, there are quite a few 1947 mentioned there. Selfstudier (talk) 11:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

That's certainly something to look at, as it provides the other half of the story that is largely omitted from the account by Issa Nakhle, but it also barely scratches the surface of the Jewish violence in 1947 and 1948. MathewMunro (talk) 12:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

ChatGPT prompt: 'I'm trying to count the number of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Jews, Hebrew speakers, and Zionist terrorist organisations such as Irgun and Stern in Palestine in 1947. I have a list of reports from British military reports from the time, and it includes things like buses and cinemas being shot-up by Jews, and that's obviously a terrorist attack, but I'm unsure whether I should count what were likely ethnically-motivated incidents of arson, robbery, and gang-bashings of Palestinians by Jews? Please restrict your reply to just one paragraph if possible.'

ChatGPT reply: 'When counting terrorist attacks by groups like Irgun, Stern, or individuals during 1947 in Palestine, it’s essential to consider the broader definition of terrorism, which includes acts of violence intended to instill fear, coerce, or intimidate a population for political or ideological reasons. Ethnically-motivated incidents of arson, robbery, and gang violence against Palestinians by Jews could be included if these actions were systematic and aimed at spreading fear or advancing a political or ideological agenda, rather than being isolated or purely criminal acts. Therefore, if such incidents were organized or had political motives, they could reasonably be counted as part of the broader campaign of terror.' MathewMunro (talk) 12:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Please stop with the ChatGPT, it's not reliable. Selfstudier (talk) 12:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia works by adding secondary sources to body, which are summarized concisely afterwards in the lede; and in cases of dispute, the talk page is used to discuss and present personal arguments. ChatGPT plays a role in neither and no one cares about what it has to say about anything. Please refrain from re-inserting disputed material. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2025

The Palestinian Arab leadership rejected partition as unacceptable, given the inequality in the proposed population exchange and the transfer of one-third of Palestine, *including most of its best agricultural land*, to recent immigrants.[36]

when reading the source provide page 223 - it doesn't state what land was considered "best" just that it was thought to be the best land.

agricultural land has been added from outside this source.

Y: including land that was considered by the Arabs to be some of the "Best" land in British mandate Palestine to recent migrants. 82.35.75.76 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Partially done. The source speaks of "its [Palestine's] most desirable land." I'll reword our text slightly to reflect the source more directly. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I only changed it to "most of its best land." Omitting the word agricultural which wasn't in the source there. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:05, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Edit request: remove passive wording regarding Palestinian refugees (23 June 2025)

Description of suggested change:

The final paragraph of the lead section ends with:

"A civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented. In 1948, 85% of the Palestinians living in the areas that became the state of Israel became refugees."

The wording "became refugees" should not be passive; the sentence itself cites a source that argues that they "became refugees" through a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing.

I'm relatively new here, and not sure if TextDiff blocks support links. In the below diff, these phrases should link: civil war, expulsion and flight, state of Israel

Diff:

−

A civil war broke out in Palestine, and the plan was not implemented. In 1948, 85% of the Palestinians living in the areas that became the state of Israel became refugees.

+

The Plan was not implemented, and a civil war quickly broke out in Palestine, leading to the [[1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight|expulsion and flight]] of 85% of the Palestinians living in the areas that became the state of Israel.

ATravellingLight (talk) 00:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done Thepharoah17 (talk) 01:58, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 30 June 2025

Description of suggested change: Please add necessary references and names in this paragraph (references requested between brackets{[]}) : "When a formal American declaration in favour of partition was given on 11 October, a public relations authority declared to the Zionist Emergency Council in a closed meeting: 'under no circumstances should any of us believe or think we had won because of the devotion of the American Government to our cause. We had won because of the sheer pressure of political logistics that was applied by the Jewish leadership in the United States'."Lonaïs Velanidia (talk) 11:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)