Talk:2008 Dimona suicide bombing: Difference between revisions

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Palestine Start‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Terrorism Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Israel Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Project Israel To Do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page. Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005 Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel. Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia. Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data. Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes. Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention. Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel. Stubs : See Israel stubs. Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People Other : Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

According to these news report:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2252970,00.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=d4aifBJXqcQ&feature=dir

It was a different set of bombers than those named on this page. Does anyone know more?Mezigue (talk) 22:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were two bombers in Dimona. One was shot on the spot. be sure to add that. --Shamir1 (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Epson Salts. This edit, with the es 'this level of detail does not belong in the lead' not only eviscerates a lead summary of the body of the text, but cancels a crucial point made by the follow-up scholarship, giving the reader the impression Hamas assumed responsibility. It did, but neither the Israeli Secret Service nor scholars of the incident believe Hamas in Damascus knew anything about it. As it stands, the text is spun by selective showcasing of one quotation and the suppression of the other evidence.Nishidani (talk) 14:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hamas did assume responsibility - that is made clear by all the sources. One author that you found claims they did not know in advance about it - that level of detail can be discussed in the article (assuming , generously, that it even is notable), but not in the lead. There is indeed spinning going on - by you - an inexplicable attempt to clear Haams of any responsibility for terrorist attacks on civilians, not just here, but on a range of similar articles. Epson Salts (talk) 14:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an answer. A precise parallel would be for a Palestinian POV extremist editor to see a text in the lead like the following:

'The Irgun and Lehi at Deir Yassin claimed responsibility for killing 254 Arabs. Aref al-Aref counted 117 victims, 7 in combat, and the rest in their homes.'

And editing out the second part,

'The Irgun and Lehi at Deir Yassin claimed responsibility for killing 254 Arabs.Aref al-Aref counted 117 victims, 7 in combat, and the rest in their homes.

with the justification:'this level of detail does not belong in the lead'

This is obvious. I have spun nothing, and I would ask you to desist once more from insinuations, repeated by the other editor as well, that I am trying to 'clear Hamas'. Me purpose here is to get the record comprehensive, straight and neutral. Nishidani (talk) 14:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is an answer. You may not like it, and you may disagree with it, but it is an answer nonetheless, based in wikipedai policy ,and like every other wikipedai editor, if you disagree with it you are going to have to find consensus for your change, or let it go. Epson Salts (talk) 14:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No wiki policy does not give any editor the right to follow (as any one can see) my edits around, to step in and revert or challenge them, and then say:'you need my consensus to restore that material.' There are a number of names for this:WP:HOUND, WP:BATTLEGROUND, and WP:Editwarring, and as Zero also noted, this gives the appearance of editing in such a way as to deny other editors a right to contribute to the encyclopedia. That is an absurd interpretation of what we are supposed to be doing here, and a recipe for reverter omnipotence across the board. You have no explained why the lead fails to summarize what the relevant section clarifies in detail, with all perspectives duly and neutrally given. Nishidani (talk) 15:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need my consensus (whatever that means) , but you need a consensus of editors for your change - which you do not have. two editors have objected to your POV-push, citing wikiepda policy. So for now, that change is out. Epson Salts (talk) 18:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The history timeline does not substantiate you there. You alone challenged the new material I added in clarification of what the prior editor wrote (and that editor has not since eviscerated the lead as you did). You had no 'consensus' for your cancellation, nor support afterwards for the way you took out the important lead balancing.Nishidani (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, the new text removes information which it would be better to retain. I've tried to write a more condensed version of the original which retains the important information, but failed to come up with anything shorter. The best I can come up with is: "The Damascus leadership of Hamas later assumed responsibility, though sceptiscism has been expressed that that group was the genuine instigator. Israeli intelligence sources consider it probable that the operation was executed at the request of some Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip." Having failed to come up with anything shorter, I would recommend the restoration of the orignal text.     ←   ZScarpia   18:52, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

that text relies on a single source, and provides a level of detail not appropriate for the lead. It can be discussed (as it is done currently) in the article body. I like how the second-in-command of the military wing of Hamas and the co-founder of Hamas becoem "some Hamas members" in your version. That certainly bodes well for NPOV in this article. Epson Salts (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look. Stop this farce. You could eliminate or challenge 99% of any article on the claim this or that part of it 'that text relies on a single source.' That's, again, wikilawyering. Atraln is an academic specializing in this topic who interviewed both top echelon Israeli and Hamas sources as part of his fieldwork. Seconbly WP:LEDE summarizes the section, and that is what I briefly did. All that you objected to was that I summarized the distinction drawn in the source, and your objection was answered by the other editor, who had the decently to offer his version of a summary, as Scarpia also suggests. Nishidani (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look, stop these double standards. you and your fellow POV -pushing buddies have been following me around for months, undoing edits on spurious grounds, and when I objected, you told me I have no consensus. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and you;re going to have to deal with it. The level of detail you want to put in the lead, based on a single author who quotes anonymous sources is simply not appropriate. as multiple editors have said. There are multiple venues open to you for dispute resolution, start using them. Epson Salts (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't rewrite my paraphrases unless you have checked them against the source I used (or any other one you turn up): Atran writes:

The Hamas leadership in Damascus later claimed responsibility for the Dimono attack (after Fatah’s Al-Aqs’ Martyrs Brigades had claimed it) but the politburo clearly did not order it or even known about it (Usama Hamdan, who handles external relations for Hamas in Beirut, initially said he didn’t known who was responsible; and when I asked senior Hamas leaders in the West Bank if this meant that he didn’t know about it, they said, “You can conclude that; we certainly didn’t”). Sources close to Israeli intelligence told me at the Knesset that Mahmoud Zahar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, and Ahmed Al-Ja’abri, the military commander of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, probably wanted to launch an operation across the Israel-Egypt border after Hamas breached the border wall between Gaza and Egypt but couldn’t; so al-Ja’abri called upon his clan ally in Hebron Ayoub Qawasmeh to conduct an operation. Ayoub Qawasmeh then tapped into the young men on the soccer team who had been earnestly waiting to do something for theior comrades and their cause.

The remodulation 'it is believed' (by whom?) etc ignores that probably meaning 'they conjecture'. It is only one account, circumstantial and hypothetical. The way Atran phrases it, his Knesset sources told him planning some operation 'across the Israeli-Egypt border' which is unintelligible unless we assume Hamas wanted to send people into Egypt from Gaza, and from Egypt back into Israel, from which we are led to guess 'Dimona', but only by conjecture. The reason is not given for why 'they couldn't.' We don't know if Mahmoud Zahar is involved or that is just a guess (this because the academic lit on hamas has outlined several rifts between the political and the military arm concerning such activities in Gaza) The language further suggests by an operation that Dimona wasn't specified. Lastly the source says nothing about a 'cell'. The Hamas soccer team. To understand the point you have to have read the whole chapter where Atran writes for example:

Soccer, paintball, camping, hiking, rafting, body building, martial arts training and other forms of physically stimulating and intimate group action create a bunch of buddies (usually not less than 4 and not more than 12, with a median of 8), who become a “band of brothers” in a glorious cause. It usually suffices that a few (usually at least two) of these action buddies come to believe in the cause, truly and uncompromisingly, for the rest to follow even unto death.

and

For example, Hamas' most-sustained suicide bombing campaign in 2003-2004 involved several buddies from Hebron's Masjad (mosque) al-Jihad soccer team. Most lived in the Wad Abu Katila neighborhood and belonged to the al-Qawasmeh hamula (clan).

Two 'buddies' from this soccer team were contacted by Ayoub and the Qawasmeh is notorious for disobeying Hamas directives (see 2014 kidnapping and murder of Israeli teenagers). I don't mind anyone entertaining crazy fantasies about my putative 'Hamas whitewashing POV' but that should not affect the correct interpretation of sources I bring to clarify what experts know, or what they say might be the case.Nishidani (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]