- Moderator
- #541
Haganah was fouded out of ncecessity as the British were not able to stop or even contol Palestinian riots & the flow of weapons to Palestinian terrorists.
In fact the British were remakably efficient at controlling the flow of weapons to the Palestinians; one reason the Zionists were so successful in expelling them.
Palestinian state is a 'fantasy', says son of Hamas founder
All MediaHaganah was fouded out of ncecessity as the British were not able to stop or even contol Palestinian riots & the flow of weapons to Palestinian terrorists.
In fact the British were remakably efficient at controlling the flow of weapons to the Palestinians; one reason the Zionists were so successful in expelling them.
Palestinian state is a 'fantasy', says son of Hamas founder
All Media
Thank you for staying with a documented fact rather than Pali supporter types of just biased claim statements.
The Wikipedia entry was also a documented fact. No more a biased claim statement than anything else presented.
It does matter is the documentation is a bias or hate site/book/document or a scholar, expert, or news article and if there is follow up to that news story.
Wiki is good for quick, simple starting point if you know little or nothing about a topic, but it should not be then end all authority. Wiki is an easy reference but it is constantly being updated and corrected. It is not intended as a propaganda site and in most cases is not.
We can for the most part accept wiki articles, but if we know there are error and can provide other proof, we should do so. We are not quoting wiki for a theses. There is not good reason for rejecting everything just because it is from wiki either.
I do take facts with a grain of salt if there is not footnote or reference or there is a note about waiting authentication.
I like to take the references as starting point for research since I am not sitting in the middle of a major library.
Even news reporters and researchers get things wrong from time to time. We should try if possible to get several sites or articles to use along with wiki if necessary. I would hope most of us would know the hate sites by now and avoid them altogether.
When on site or articles references their source as a hate site "beware". Some sites with a strong bias do get their stories from legitimate sources but put their own opinions with the story, does not mean they are wrong.
MEMRI might seem bias if you only see a few articles from them, but they are just a translations service for the news, TV and events. Originals are there to prove the translations are correct and not fabricated by MEMRI.
If a source is wrong or outdated, I'm sure someone will notice and bring it to our attention.
I have noticed some poster confuse opinions, speculations and supposition with facts. I'm sure in most cases those will be pointed out as well by others.
We are not writing a college paper, just participating in a forum and sharing opinions. I would hope most opinions are based on fact or experience and not just pure passion or hate.
I would also hope most poster are here for their enjoyment and education, not to incite a mob reaction to events and issues.
JMHO
What I like about wiki is - everyone can contribute, on all sides of an issue. It also requires sourcing so you can run down sources and evaluate them independently of Wiki - if there are insufficient sources, citations or if there is strong bias it is noted. I can't think of any other site that provides as good an unbiased starting points.
I totally agree with you on confusing opinions, speculations and supposition with facts. I also think a lot of "hate sites" do exactly that, they may have a kernal of truth but they fill it in with opinions, inflammatory language and sometimes outright dishonesty (such as posting pictures from some other event and implying they are relevant to the article). I find certain language brings out "red flags" and makes me skeptical of the article's agenda - language that makes shoddy Nazi comparisons, uses words like evil, implies all of a group are rapists, murderers, racists etc....inflammatory language usually means the article has little basis in facts, in my opinion. That's how I view it.