Talk:Awni Abd al-Hadi

"Fakhri 'Abd al-Hadi" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fakhri &. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,Rosguill talk 18:28, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Peel commission interview
There is no valid source for: In 1937 he testified to the Peel Commission, "There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria." The source listed merely states this with no reference to any primary source or even a valid secondary source. There is no record of al-Hadi saying this. Mcdruid (talk) 19:28, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It appears on page 2 of a World Scientific book, no problem seeing he said this. ---Lilach5 (לילך5) discuss 19:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * An ardent pan Arabist could have said said something like this, what is missing is proper context, I suggest you think about adding some material from say this book and others similar. I might do it myself if I get some time. Selfstudier (talk) 23:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree with Selfstudier. Having a quote like this without context is not the stuff of encyclopedias, including Wikipedia. Unfortunately, we see this type of thing too often in articles related to the I/P and A/I conflicts. Al Ameer (talk) 20:06, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That is a study by a Joseph Pelzman, saying Awni Abd al-Hadi told the Peel commission this. However, there is no mention of this in the final report of the commission. So wether he told them or not, it obviously was not important to  them. And iff he told them: the context is totally lacking. I think we should remove it, Huldra (talk) 21:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This has some of the major testimonies but 'Abd al-Hadi is not there, and this says he did testify and it was published in English and Arabic but I don't know how to find that. Selfstudier (talk) 22:44, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Very interesting! And he is listed ... as "Auni Bey Abdul Hadi". But nothing like the quote just removed. Huldra (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Good spot, I missed that altogether :) Well, if we have his testimony and it isn't there, then I support removing it. Selfstudier (talk) 23:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * We have:
 * Auni Bey Abdul Hadi public testimony <- Peel Commission
 * Auni Bey Abdul Hadi closing argument <- The Lofgren Commission (1930 Western Wall Commission)
 * Some of what he actually said there should possibly be added? Huldra (talk) 23:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ideally we would want secondary discussion of what he said (like in Nur Masalha) else we will be accused of cherry picking, maybe put it in Wikisource? Oh, and Auni Bey Abdul Hadi as an aka :) Selfstudier (talk) 23:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree. But we could put a link to the two above as an WP:EL? Also, note that he refers both to "Palestine" and "Palestinians", strange that, iff the quote which started this was actually correct, Huldra (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Extlinks are good, why not? It's beginning to look as if he did not say what was ascribed to him, at least not to the Peel Commission. Given his position(s), he had to balance things between Arabs in general and Palestinians specifically and I think that's clear from the testimony. Selfstudier (talk) 23:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That's false, the Arab leadership always claimed that it was al-Sham and part of Greater Syria, even in the General Assembly in 1947 the Arabs said the same thing as Abd al-Hadi, Same was said by the PLO chairman in the 60s to the Security Council that Palestine was a southern province of Greater Syria also known as Bilad al-Sham.
 * You are trying to erase parts of history with doesn't fit your narrative. 2A10:8001:CAE0:0:D0C1:3132:34C1:333A (talk) 15:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, the statement "Abd al-Hadi was a moderate who was prepared to negotiate with members of the Yishuv" sounds fishy, when he stated to the Peel commission: "Near the end of his testimony the Commission asked Auni Bey if he would be willing, for the sake of peace, to sit down at a British Government-organized roundtable conference with the British and Jewish sides. Auni Bey’s answer left no room for doubt: “The Arabs do not admit the existence of the Jews as Zionists at all... we utterly refuse to meet at the same table with any persons who call themselves Zionist Jews”.

I don't get those two statements to fit together, frankly. And while the second statement is "straight from the horse's mouth"; what is the first statement based on? Does anyone have the Eisenberg & Caplan book? Huldra (talk) 23:04, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * What it says on p.9 (not p 13):
 * "Only a few Palestinian spokesmen, such as Awni Abd al-Hadi, Omar Salih al-Barghuthi, and Musa Alami, were willing, on occasion, to enter into face-to-face dialogue with important Zionist figures. The ranking leader of the factionalized Palestinian Arab community, the Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Haj Amin al-Husayni, wielded much greater influence than these individuals but was not inclined to negotiate. Leading notables of the rival Nashashibi family, on the other hand, were not averse to talks with the Zionists, but commanded considerably less popular support."
 * On p.13 it says:
 * "Even before his mid-1934 meeting with Ben-Gurion, Palestinian leader Awni Abd al-Hadi had similarly recognized the harsh reality that "the goal of the Jews was to take over the country and the goal of the Arabs was to fight against that takeover.""
 * Selfstudier (talk) 09:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, at least to the Peel commission, he sounded far more like Amin al-Husseini, than the Nashashibis. Also, interesting, the words ascribed to him sounds more like those coming from George Antonius, Huldra (talk) 23:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)