| Revision as of 19:56, 25 July 2014 editJmwikiacc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,411 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 05:29, 5 November 2024 edit undoRedxiv (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,341 edits →Biased Lead: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
| (149 intermediate revisions by 60 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{ |
{{Talk header|search=y}} | ||
| {{notice|{{Graph:PageViews|90}}|heading=Daily page views |center=y |image=Open data small color.png}} | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Palestine|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Military history | |||
| <!-- B-Class 5-criteria checklist --> | |||
| |class =C | |||
| |B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> =n | |B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> =n | ||
| |B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> =n | |B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> =n | ||
| Line 9: | Line 10: | ||
| |B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> =y | |B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> =y | ||
| |B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> =y | |B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> =y | ||
| |British=y|Middle-Eastern=y}} | |British =y | ||
| |Middle-Eastern =y}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Israel |
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Jewish history |
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|terrorism=yes|terrorism-imp=Low |importance=Low|organizedcrime=yes|organizedcrime-imp=Low}} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 125K | |maxarchivesize = 125K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 3 | ||
| |algo = old(45d) | |algo = old(45d) | ||
| |archive = Talk:Lehi (group) %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Lehi (militant group)/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == |
==Biased Lead== | ||
| Why does it call them a militant group rather than terrorist. They definitely fall under the definition of a terrorist group. | |||
| The term terrorist is not ]. Lehi also didn't call themselves terrorist. They said the "true terrorists were the British." It is in the sources some of which are falsely represented and some are simply a guy's opinion. No lead for Hamas, Hizballah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Qaeda, ISIS, the IRA or anyone else start with "was a ] organization." A responsible editor (other than racist warriors who commented on this before) should remove the biased racist lead. Words that are commonly used are "designated by" as terrorist. But all these groups are called radical or paramilitary or militant etc. Unacceptable. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Terrorism Template == | |||
| :Thanks for bringing this to my attention. According to a long standing policy here, Misplaced Pages does not directly label individuals or groups as terrorists. Fixed. ] (]) 08:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
| I think this should be added to the article.] (]) 02:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC) {{tlx|terrorism}} | |||
| :This topic has been raised twice recently in other discussions: and - including one talk thread by a very similar IP address - and many more times in the discussion archive. The reasons for this have been explained in detail, but the short answer is that not only was Lehi called a terrorist group by the relevant authorities of the day, but its operatives called themselves terrorists and produced literature justifying their use of terrorism as a legitimate strategy. ] means balance with respect to sources, and there is agreement between the sources on this. ] (]) 09:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
| ::Given that Lehi was not only designated as a terrorist group, they ''self-identified'' as such, it seems like NPOV to call them a "militant group" instead. — ] <sup>(])</sup> 05:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == WP:MISSION == | |||
| :Why? It presents NPOV problems. The article currently says that Lehi was described as terrorist, and it attributes those descriptions. How does the template help the reader? — ] {{toolbar|separator=dot|] | ] }} 02:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Your argument seems to be against the template itself, rather than the addition of the template to this article. Lehi is a fine example of not only a terrorist group, but the success political violence can bring (case in point, the creation of Israel). ] (]) 19:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::There does not seem to be a case for applying this template here. We do not apply the template to organizations which are even callest terrorists by most of the world. Cases in point: ], ]. Aside from that, I am categorically opposed to navigation templates of this type, but that of course has nothing to do with the NPOV issue. —] <sup>(])</sup> 21:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::::If Lehi was not a terrorist organisation, then there have been no terrorist organisations. But I am also opposed to templates like this so I am not going to insert this one here. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 00:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I can't help but feel that the section entitled "18 Principles of Rebirth" is currently something of a violation of ] in its reproduction of Levi's pamphlet in full rather than in summary form. This needs condensing somehow. ] (]) 06:15, 6 February 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Recent revert == | |||
| I recently made this edit which was reverted with a summary calling it "a massive copyright vio" and Mike Shabazz put a huge template on my talk page. This is simply not true. I put up material that was sourced and relevant and NOT plagiarized. The reversion erased important context. ] (]) 13:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Anti-British sentiment == | |||
| I might add that the entire section '''Foundations and Founding''' contained ''not one reference'' prior to my edit, so was on the face of it ]. If there were some wording that was too like the original, it would have been better to change it than to simply dump the material with a terse edit summary and then plaster a nasty template on the editor's talk page. ] (]) 13:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| @] : In you added the following citation to the "Anti-British sentiment" line in the infobox: | |||
| :Please read ]. Nearly everything you added to the article was copied verbatim from Colin Shindler's . | |||
| <nowiki><ref>The Stern Gang: Ideology, Politics and Terror, 1940-1949 Joseph Heller page 114 "Above all, in the summer of 1943 Lehi had still not broken free from the doctrine of persecutor and enemy'. Even after the extent of the Holocaust was revealed, Lehi refused to depict Hitler rather than England as the main foe."</ref></nowiki> | |||
| :If you look below the edit window, you'll see a sentence that says "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." Per policy, I deleted the offending material. — ] {{toolbar|separator=dot|] | ] }} 17:35, 30 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| However when the term ] is usually used , it's commonly a reference to prejudice against British people rather than the British government. In this case the reference only shows a strong opposition to British Imperial rule on the part of Lehi, not against ordinary Britons. | |||
| ::That's simply not so. ] (]) 00:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Could this be clarified in the text? ] (]) (]) 14:51, 10 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| : I don't agree with you about the common meaning of "anti-British sentiment", especially in a historical context. Note that the great majority of examples in ] refer to the British government or officials. Suggest a wording and we can discuss it. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Revisionist Zionism? == | |||
| Stellarkid: While Jabotinsky had hoped that diplomacy and Britain would prevail for the Jewish cause, Stern argued that the era of Zionist diplomacy had come to an end and the time had come for armed struggle against the British. | |||
| Hello. Would like to contest the description of the Lehi as revisionists. Laqueur, who is cited word-for-word at many points in this article points out in his History of Zionism that the Lehi rejected revisionism. | |||
| Shindler: put his faith in diplomacy and Britain ... Avraham Stern, a leading Irgun militant, argued that the era of Zionist diplomacy had come to an end. ... the only way forward was armed struggle against the British. | |||
| "The split in Irgun occurred in the first half of 1940. It d id not come altogether as a surprise, for the attitude towards Britain was not the only issue at stake. For several years previously Stern had pursued a policy assigned to detach Irgun from revisionism." | |||
| Stellarkid: In 1940, the idea of the Final Solution was still "unthinkable," and Stern believed that Hitler wanted to make Germany ''judenrein'' through emigration, as opposed to extermination. | |||
| I think it would be better to describe them as just "Zionists" rather than Revisionist Zionists. ] (]) 17:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC) | |||
| Shindler: ... the very idea of the Final Solution was unthinkable in 1940. ... Stern believed that Hitler wanted Germany to be ''judenrein'' through emigration. | |||
| :Like many political movements, Zionism is a broad church with numerous variations with it. ] (]) 00:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == 'National Bolshevism' == | |||
| Stellarkid: In December of 1940, he initiated contact with Nazi authorities, in order to enlist their aid in establishing the Jewish state in Palestine open to Jewish refugees from Nazism. He proposed to recruit some 40,000 Jews from occupied Europe with the intention of invading Palestine to oust the British. | |||
| Whilst surely the Lehi adopted both socialistic and nationalistic stances I'd contest: | |||
| Shindler: Thus, in December 1940, Stern sent an emissary to meet a representative of the German Foreign Office in Beirut. ... requested the recruitment of 40,000 Jews from occupied Europe for a purposed invasion of Palestine to oust the British. | |||
| 1. It had clear enough political views to be defined in that way | |||
| 2. It was in any way 'bolshevik' | |||
| And even if I were wrong about both of these things, the label is still anachronistic. If someone wants to contest it they can bring it back but I feel fairly confident in removing the label. ] (]) 09:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok apparently I can't edit it, but it should definitely be edited!!! ] (]) 09:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Stellarkid: The Germans did not take this proposal seriously, however, and nothing was to come of it. | |||
| == Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2024 == | |||
| Shindler: The Germans did not take the proposal seriously. | |||
| {{edit extended-protected|Lehi (militant group)|answered=yes}} | |||
| :Stellarkid, what do you propose we do about your ]? — ] {{toolbar|separator=dot|] | ] }} 03:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Please add English translations so that those who cannot read Hebrew may understand. For Example: | |||
| ''Hamaas'' = "The Action"; | |||
| == Bad footnote reference? == | |||
| ''HaKhazit'' = "The Front"; | |||
| It appears to me that the footnote provided in the '''three main goals''' (under section '''Goals and methods''') given as footnote - ''Heller, p. 112, quoted in Perliger and Weinberg, 2003, pp. 106-107'' is bad. I don't see it in the Heller book on the page given, but I do see it here, | |||
| ''Mivrak'' = "Telegram"; | |||
| ''Religious fundamentalism and political extremism -- By Leonard Weinberg, Ami Pedahzur'' pg 106. I don't like to mess around with other people's footnotes but ... Maybe the originator might want to correct or clarify? ] (]) 01:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ''BaMahteret'' = "Underground"; ] (]) 04:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : {{Done}} thanks. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 14:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :If the source is wrong and you found an alternative, by all means change it. — ] {{toolbar|separator=dot|] | ] }} 03:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Text of offer to the Nazis == | |||
| The text of the Lehi offer to the Nazis has only been completely published in David Yisraeli's thesis. However, there is a transcription of it (in the original German) on the web . This web site is arguable as a "reliable source", but since I have just now compared the text there word by word against Yisraeli's thesis without finding any differences, I have added the site as a ]. I can send a copy of pages 315-317 of Yisraeli's thesis to anyone who asks by email. There is also, , a transcription of the English translation that appeared in Lenni Brenner's book "The Iron Wall". ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 03:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Deir Yassin Myth== | |||
| Deir Yassin was a myth perpetrated by the arabs to entice their hatred for Israel and Jews. http://www.hirhome.com/israel/milstein-deir-yassin.htm <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Milstein's theories, which are not widely accepted, are mentioned at ]. They don't justify deleting sections of this article. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 08:00, 13 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Myth or not - writing that the fact that Lehi's Jewish political rivals denounced the results of the battle there "lends credence" to the allegation of massacre is not exactly an academic argument... Ben Gurion had a very good reason to tarnish the reputation of the Lehi and IZL in the political struggle between his political party and theirs. I therefore submit that you should change the wording - state the fact that Ben Gurion etc denounced the alleged massacre, delete the "lends credence". Whether there was an actual massacre as claimed by the Arabs or only a battle in which civilians were killed accidently as claimed by the Lehi and IZL, or something in between, will | |||
| never be known. All of the participants in those events, Jews and Arabs, those directly involved and those indirectly involved (which adds also the British authorities occupying the region) had incentives to lie in order to further | |||
| their political goals, and that remains true today. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:21, 25 May 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::Just on correct usage. one does not 'entice'(hatred for Israel, or any other hatred). You mean 'incite', a verb with a very particular history in I/P political discourse. | |||
| ::(a) 'Milstein argues that there was '''no organised, largescale massacre in Deir Yassin'''.' | |||
| ::(b)'Milstein admits (''History'' IV pp.382-88) that '''whole families were gunned down''' in the course of the fighting.'Benny Morris, ''The Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited,'' Cambridge University Press, 2004 p.294 n.564. | |||
| ::(c) Read Morris's account of the facts and the controversy (pp.237ff.). His view, that a massacre took place, draws on Irgun, Palmach, Haganah and Lehi reports.] (]) 10:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::reconcile the two positions, and then reread what you wrote.] (]) 10:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Polish Support == | |||
| It is not clear why Polish Army trained Lehi members. What was the reason? | |||
| ] (]) 13:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :They wanted to get rid of the Jews too. They trained them in hopes that they would be successful and all the Jews would leave Poland. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 06:07, 1 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Ernst Blevin Plot == | |||
| I could not find any mention of this in the article, it seems like a fairly significant plot on their part. | |||
| https://gloucestershirepsc.wordpress.com/2010/08/ | |||
| (BBC source) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == "In Purple" == | |||
| The references to Ada Amichal Yevin, "In Purple," were added by an editor who regularly lied about sources and was eventually banned after doing a lot of damage. Since I don't have access to that Hebrew book (which seems to be a Lehi apologia), I'm replacing the citations by tags until the words can written on the basis of sources provided by editors in good standing. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 06:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == "Terrorist group" == | |||
| The article already specified who considered Lehi a terrorist group, same standard applied to ] and other militant organizations. is arbitrary and POV.--] (]) 14:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :'''considered''' Lehi a terrorist group,' i.e., 'terrorist' is a subjective term. Well, in common and political usage, it certainly often is, meaning a non-state actor which behaves like a state actor which has no problems resorting to terror. A 'militant' is how we describe neutrally people whom, in one POV, are terrorists, but in another are simply people who take up arms to fight for the dignity of their people and an autonomous state. I don't like that term myself, but that's how this place works. But when you have, as in this case, numerous legal documents and otherwise level-headed historical works which call them terrorists, one goes with that. Note 22 cites a source which has them defining themselves as terrorists. If they self-defined as terrorists, they had no disagreement with the British on how to describe what they were.] (]) 14:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Fully agreed. | |||
| ::NPoV doesn't mean we have to use neutral words. It means we have to use give the right weight to each point of view. | |||
| ::Eg :Haganah was considered terrorist by some but we talk about this as the Yishuv army because this is current point of view widely accepted. On the contraty, all historians refer to Lehi as a terrorist organisation nowaydays. | |||
| ::] (]) 16:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::See ]. We don't use this term in Misplaced Pages's voice to describe the PLO, the PFLP or any of the other dozen Palestinian terrorist organizations, and we sure as hell aren't going to use it here. ] (]) 04:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Please read the discussion above. Lehi described themselves as terrorists (see note 22), which makes them much different from the Palestinian groups you mention. So we "sure as hell" don't have to do the same thing here as we do elsewhere, because the situations are not entirely analogous. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 05:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::It's already specified in the article why Lehi considered terrorism to be "necessary" at the time... so why suddenly you have the need to change a neutral term (militant) in the lead? It's simply POV. After all, if I quote a Hamas leader admitting they deliberately attacked civilian population in Israel... are you willing to replace the word "militant" for "terrorist" as an objective term? What about behaving like a terrorist group but not admitting it?--] (]) 05:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::How can it be POV when they acknowledge they were terrorists themselves, and it is agreed upon by other parties at the time (such as the British authorities) as well as historians who cover the topic? ] (]) 08:12, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == reason for nazi 'alliance' == | |||
| According to the people quoted in this news report: | |||
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=INGR2wzEuZA | |||
| reason for the alliance with germany was to save the Jews from Hitler. (as opposed to defeating the British). | |||
| Should be added in the article somewhere? | |||
| ] (]) 08:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :You have the wrong page, you need ]. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 09:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::And even there, this unidentified YouTube extract is apparently a copyright violation, and not a reliable source. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">] (])</span> 09:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| There is an interview with Israel Eldad on youtube that says the same thing. The idea was to throw the British out as quickly as possible in order to remove the restrictions on immigration as fast as possible in order to save the jews of europe. Eldad explains the debate between Stern, Jabotinsky, Begin, and Raziel that they had at the final meeting of the Irgun central command in Poland http://youtube.com/watch?v=EgAvGE21Mds <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Mail bombs to Truman? == | |||
| For the record: Several sources state that Ira Smith's book ''"Dear Mr. President ..." The story of fifty years in the White House mail room'' (1949) claimed that letter bombs from Lehi addressed to Truman were received in 1947, and even that Lehi had claimed responsibility for them. Since Smith was in charge of the White House mail room, that would be an impeccable source. However, Smith's book does not actually make this claim. He describes the letter bombs received by Eden and other British politicians, then says "The same kind of terrorist letters had been found in the White House mail, and as a result the staff had been handling all letters with great care..." (p. 230). He doesn't actually state that the letters to Truman were from Lehi, only that they were the "same kind of terrorist letters". ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 08:44, 7 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Good pimpernelling. Sorry, I restored the material in a revert (leaving the page open while shopping) before seeing this. I think this source should be added to the text.] (]) 09:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == The entire introduction? == | |||
| Seems like something taking out of a Arafat press release. Their is obviously POV going on here. I think we need to re-edit the main intro or source the claims of lehi trying to make an alliance with the Nazi's? otherwise it tarnishes this page. ] (]) 02:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC) | |||
| : It is extensively sourced in the article. It isn't disputed, either, though the motivation is disputed. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 07:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Deir Yassin massacre section == | |||
| The Deir Yassin massacre section of the article is very poorly written, makes contested claims as if they are facts, gets facts wrong (actually it was the Irgun that claimed 250 Arabs were killed), and so on. Given its extensive coverage in other articles, I propose to reduce this to a few sentences. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 07:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:29, 5 November 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lehi (militant group) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 45 days  |
 | Daily page views
|
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Structure: criterion met.svg)
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
Biased Lead
The term terrorist is not WP:NPOV. Lehi also didn't call themselves terrorist. They said the "true terrorists were the British." It is in the sources some of which are falsely represented and some are simply a guy's opinion. No lead for Hamas, Hizballah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Qaeda, ISIS, the IRA or anyone else start with "was a terrorist organization." A responsible editor (other than racist warriors who commented on this before) should remove the biased racist lead. Words that are commonly used are "designated by" as terrorist. But all these groups are called radical or paramilitary or militant etc. Unacceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:9F04:FCC0:56E:BD73:4CBA:A1F7 (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing this to my attention. According to a long standing policy here, Misplaced Pages does not directly label individuals or groups as terrorists. Fixed. Tombah (talk) 08:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- This topic has been raised twice recently in other discussions: and - including one talk thread by a very similar IP address - and many more times in the discussion archive. The reasons for this have been explained in detail, but the short answer is that not only was Lehi called a terrorist group by the relevant authorities of the day, but its operatives called themselves terrorists and produced literature justifying their use of terrorism as a legitimate strategy. WP:NPOV means balance with respect to sources, and there is agreement between the sources on this. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Given that Lehi was not only designated as a terrorist group, they self-identified as such, it seems like NPOV to call them a "militant group" instead. — Red XIV 05:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
WP:MISSION
I can't help but feel that the section entitled "18 Principles of Rebirth" is currently something of a violation of WP:MISSION in its reproduction of Levi's pamphlet in full rather than in summary form. This needs condensing somehow. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Anti-British sentiment
@KiKz Nightwing : In this edit you added the following citation to the "Anti-British sentiment" line in the infobox:
<ref>The Stern Gang: Ideology, Politics and Terror, 1940-1949 Joseph Heller page 114 "Above all, in the summer of 1943 Lehi had still not broken free from the doctrine of persecutor and enemy'. Even after the extent of the Holocaust was revealed, Lehi refused to depict Hitler rather than England as the main foe."</ref>
However when the term anti-British sentiment is usually used , it's commonly a reference to prejudice against British people rather than the British government. In this case the reference only shows a strong opposition to British Imperial rule on the part of Lehi, not against ordinary Britons.
Could this be clarified in the text? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:51, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't agree with you about the common meaning of "anti-British sentiment", especially in a historical context. Note that the great majority of examples in Anti-British sentiment refer to the British government or officials. Suggest a wording and we can discuss it. Zero 01:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Revisionist Zionism?
Hello. Would like to contest the description of the Lehi as revisionists. Laqueur, who is cited word-for-word at many points in this article points out in his History of Zionism that the Lehi rejected revisionism.
"The split in Irgun occurred in the first half of 1940. It d id not come altogether as a surprise, for the attitude towards Britain was not the only issue at stake. For several years previously Stern had pursued a policy assigned to detach Irgun from revisionism."
I think it would be better to describe them as just "Zionists" rather than Revisionist Zionists. Horarum (talk) 17:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Like many political movements, Zionism is a broad church with numerous variations with it. 2A0A:EF40:387:5F01:C07F:7134:EC17:AAEF (talk) 00:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
'National Bolshevism'
Whilst surely the Lehi adopted both socialistic and nationalistic stances I'd contest: 1. It had clear enough political views to be defined in that way 2. It was in any way 'bolshevik' And even if I were wrong about both of these things, the label is still anachronistic. If someone wants to contest it they can bring it back but I feel fairly confident in removing the label. Mooneylupin (talk) 09:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ok apparently I can't edit it, but it should definitely be edited!!! Mooneylupin (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2024
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add English translations so that those who cannot read Hebrew may understand. For Example: Hamaas = "The Action"; HaKhazit = "The Front"; Mivrak = "Telegram"; BaMahteret = "Underground"; ComeAndHear (talk) 04:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Done thanks. Zero 14:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Palestine-related articles
- Mid-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class British military history articles
- British military history task force articles
- Start-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- Start-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- C-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- C-Class Jewish history-related articles
- Mid-importance Jewish history-related articles
- WikiProject Jewish history articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Crime-related articles
- Low-importance Crime-related articles
- C-Class Organized crime articles
- Low-importance Organized crime articles
- Organized crime task force articles
- C-Class Terrorism articles
- Low-importance Terrorism articles
- Terrorism task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles