Talk:Moshe Ya'alon

Discussion on the article
Here is some stuff I removed. Because it is all highly controversial, it needs attribution. For example, when did he admit his error, and what exactly did he say? Why is it important that Ya'alon was present on 6 April 2002? Was the condemnation of Halutz by the Knesset extended to him, or was it just Halutz?

Also in what context did Ya'alon say (or not say) "we won"?

DJ Clayworth 19:46, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Yaalon has admitted his greatest error as Ramat Kal was allowing Air Force Chief Dan Halutz convince him to drop a 1000 kilogram bomb on an over-populated Palestinian apartment building which killed 11 innocent children.
 * Yaalon stood by foolishly when Halutz crowed in a public briefing on 6 April 2002, "the IDF has the highest combat ethics of any army in the world," and told his pilots, "you are not responsible for the contents of that target. Your execution was perfect. You were wonderful."
 * Knesset members Yossi Sarid, Zahava Galon & Silvan Shalom equated the statement to admitting state terrorism by IDF's generals.
 * Yaalon candidly admitted his part in the operation which killed ll children, to Haaretz Newspaper on 27 August 2002, "the Palestinian threat harbors cancer like attributes that have to be severed.There are all kinds of solutions to cancer. Some say it's necessary to amputate organs but at the moment I am applying chemotheraphy."
 * With Sharons announcement of evacuating Gaza, Yaalon will fight cancer by removing the patient, in this case-Israel, out of the cancer area which will effect a 100% cancer cure.

The part removed is very unaccurate, to say the least. Very POV and clearly be classtified as incitement. Also to note that similiar paragraphs were removed from the article on Shaul Mofaz. The paragraph in the head of the Disscussion page is clearly an incitement propganda, as it suggests that Yaalon is worse as a Nazi. I also think that it is against Wikipedia rules and should be removed even from the Disscussion page. Nevertheless, I would like to hear more Wiki senior user or admin opinion on the "Incitement against Yaalon" paragraph. Thanks. MathKnight 18:56, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

If you wish to assert that "all IDF authority is in the hands of Halutz" then we need a reference for that. It would be a controversial allegation that a deputy has more power than his chief. DJ Clayworth 17:39, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Anonymous 216...

You are adding to this article statements which have nothing to do with Moshe Ya'alon. If you want to write things about Dan Haluts, please create and article for him and add them to that. Also the things you are saying about Ya'alon are matters of interpretation. I doubt very much that Ya'alon would agree with them. Please read Neutral point of view to find out about the way we would like articles to be written in Wikipedia. DJ Clayworth 20:23, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Copywrite Violation
A while ago this edit was made " 19:49, 3 March 2004 MathKnight (added more bio info, removed political debates and speculations)" which was a copywrite violation of this page. Since this copywritten paragraph is still almost verbatim, I am reverting the entire article, and sections that were not copywrite violations can be readded as needed. Joshdboz 10:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

April 18, 1996 event and lawsuit
Does anybody know whatever happened to this suit?

Two of the CCR lawyers listed at the bottom also represent fascists at GTMO, and I was wondering if that connection was worth mentioning. -- Randy2063 02:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Bogus quotation
In the New York Times and in a scholarly book, Yalon is cited as making a statement "The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people." Professor Rashid Khalidi, apparently the first to publish the quote, cites it to a Yalon interview where it does not appear, but where it is stated that terrorism would not make Israelis into a defeated people. Others have echoed this apparently false quote in print. It is very serious to have people citing one falsely. Yalon is entitled to a correction on Wikipedia.160.39.35.50 (talk) 10:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Pace Eleland, siegman does not use the bogus quote. Careless googling produces a comment section in the Seattle Post=Intelligencer in which someone who dislikes Siegnam’s position brings the quote.Historicist (talk) 10:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I am willing to leave the names of the perpetrators out of the article. However, the assertion that this is a fabricated quote merits space in respect for Yalon, who has had his words twisted.  Think how any of us would feel if the New York Times quoted us as saying exactly the opposite of what we had said.Historicist (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The claim made in your passage is unsourced, and I have chosen to delete it. You provide no evidence that the quote is false beyond the assertion of CAMERA (and two people affiliated with CAMERA, as seen in your footnote), hardly an impartial organization. I am more willing to trust the fact checkers at the NYT than empty claims. If the quote actually turns out to be false, then fine, I believe it should be made known, though not necessarily in the way that was done in the first attempt. By separating the passage from the rest of "Biography" subheading (the only other subheading in the article, for that matter), you are giving it undue importance. A misquote is hardly worthy of that, and there could be a better forum for addressing this. Also, the passage reads like a sloppy press release. Did you just jump on wikipedia as soon as the article was released to get a head start on all those who would google Ya'alon (note grammatical and spelling mistakes, in addition to to spelling Ya'alon as "Yalon," which is inconsistent with the rest of the article). It is clear to me that you have absolutely no interest in the content of the article itself (did you even read it before editing?). Salomnais (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * First, the quote is anyway irrelevant to Ya'alon's overall biography. Second, Siegman has used the quote both in the International Herald Tribune and the New York Review of Books. The quote is even in Siegman's Wikipedia article, for Pete's sake. I don't know or care what appeared in an newspaper comments section, and Historicist's bizarre insistence that I must have got it from there is complete nonsense. For somebody who calls himself "Historicist," this guy has a remarkably loose grip on reality. He claims for example that Khalidi was the first guy to use the quote, but Khalidi cited the quote "as cited in" a Washington Times article which indeed does contain the quote, which it cites vaguely to Ha'aretz (no date, title, or page number.) Amazingly, this is what even the CAMERA piece says. So here we have somebody who is not only using unreliable sources, but is misreading and contradicting them. And he has the nerve to go on about "careless googling" while simply making things up out of his own mind and then sticking them in Wikipedia articles.
 * And yes, to answer Salomnais' question, the main point of this is almost certainly to get a head start on Google results. Careless or not. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 22:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * You really cannot go around removing reliable material just because you do not like the politics of the source. CAMERA is a highly political organization.  However, it has an extremely  high reputation for getting its sources and facts and quotations right.  It is obsessive about this because getting these thing accurate is the entire purpose of the organization.  They exist to catch and point our the errors in newspapers.  Lots of people don't like CAMERA, but when they find an error of fact or citation, theire finding is regarded as accurate.  CAMERA's spin, opinions and judgement are open to debate.  It's nitpicking accuracy is a matter of fact.  That said, there are two reliable sources here.  and Yaalon is entitled to have the correciton on his page.Historicist (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * You really cannot go around bullshitting people and then try and change the subject when you're called on it. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 01:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Eleland, have you read the two sources?  Can you find the quote being used by Ya'alon?   Please consider the possibility that CAMERA is correct?Historicist (talk) 02:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Please consider the possibility that I have not discussed whether CAMERA is correct and do not intend to. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 01:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Historicist, again, my personal opinion of CAMERA had nothing to do with my decision to remove the material. You have provided no sources to back up your claims. The burden of proof here rests with those who contend that the quote is false, as it has already been published in a number of reputable newspapers and is therefore commonly accepted as accurate. Salomnais (talk) 12:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I found the quote attributed to Yaalon in an April 2003 article http://www.cfr.org/publication/5878/israel_is_an_occupier_with_a_duty_to_protect.html, this came two months before Khalidi's quote and the wiki's contention of earliest use. 198.22.236.230 (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

bogus quotation
This belongs on the page because
 * 1) It is well-sourced
 * 2) it is widely cited
 * 3) the man has been misquoted and is entitled to have the record set straight
 * 4) having the quote debunked will protect anti-Israel activists like Rashid Khalidi from making fools of themselvesHistoricist (talk) 15:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This is probably the only article where this is relevant because the only person this quotation is relevant to, if anyone, is Ya'alon. - It was WP:COATRACK-ed into at least four articles that I have found so far, in WP:BLP violating form.  See WP:BLP/N.  I've changed the section here to match the reliable sources, and removed the unreliable partisan sourcing.  There is as yet no reliable source to say that the quote is bogus, fabricated, or even incorrect, only the New York Times statement that it is unverifiable and does not appear in the interview where it is generally attributed.  Anything beyond that needs reliable sourcing. 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've eliminated the BLP violations and non-reliable sources again. There is a related issue (and related edit warring) on this and at least four other pages where the material appears, accessible from the above link.  Please discuss disputed additions on the talk page here, and do not edit war, particularly over material rejected as a BLP violation.Wikidemon (talk) 17:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm here from the CAMERA article. If there were reliable sources which indicated that CAMERA did have a role in debunking this quote, then I think the material should be re-inserted, as the quote has been widely circulated, and CAMERA's role would acquire notability. I don't think we've achieved "edit war" status yet, have we? cojoco (talk) 22:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I cropped out the contentious bits and toned down the inflammatory wording to something more neutral. Well, at least until Historicist decides to butcher the English language again. GrizzledOldMan (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've further condensed and reworded things as follows, based on the observation that the Arnaud de Borchgrave article that some are claiming is the origin of a supposed misquote of a Haaretz article does not in fact claim that the quote came from that interview. In fact, deBorchgrave says, at the end of a paragraph attributing various things to different sources, Civilians -- and civil worldviews -- have been totally excluded from any involvement or influence in the diplomatic process," according to Ha'aretz. "The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness," Gen. Yaalon is reported to have said, "that they are a defeated people.  All he says is that Ya'alon "is reported to have said" this, not that he did, and not who reported it.  There is no support for a claim that this is the first known instance, or that deBorchgrave's quotation is an "alternative version" of the Haaretz interview.  It is not clear that anything has been twisted at all, so the sentence analyzing what Ya'alon supposedly really said is impertinent.  The whole thing seems to be evaporating.  All we have is a brief, unexplained retraction by the New York Times over a quote it could not verify, and several partisans making hay of it in their ongoing effort to discredit scholars and journalists they see as ideological opponents.  Wikidemon (talk) 21:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, looks like I added a recent reference before reading the Talk page and realizing the issue was highly contensious here. Nonetheless, it appears that the Toronto Star article published today explains the history of the quote and the various newspapers that have since issued corrections. Therefore, I think it is highly relevant to this article. Singularity42 (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, and thanks for bringing that to our attention. The new Torronto Star analysis / apology is truly new information, source-wise, and answers a number of the concerns.  I agree with cojoco's comment above, that if we do have a neutral third party reliable source commenting on CAMERA's role in debunking the quote, it should be mentioned.  The new piece does exactly that, and casts CAMERA as the (a?) main proponent of setting the record straight.  It is also one of the first pieces to out-and-out say that Ya'alon didn't say it during the Haaretz interview (as opposed to that it was not in the published version of the interview), and to come out with such a strong statement that he never said it at all.  The Star piece also mentions Khalidi's repeating the quote in the New York Times being a pivotal moment that convinced CAMERA to take action.  The article further notes for context that the effect of the quote, and why it is important, was that it vilified Ya'alon and Israel as heartless aggressors.  All of that is legitimate, in my opinion, because it's reliably sourced now to an independent newspaper that conducted an investigation into the matter, and not to the advocates themselves.  However, I do not think we can take this one step further, to conduct our own original research into the spread of the quotation, or endorse CAMERA's attempts to cast Khalidi and other ideological opponents in a bad light.  The article casts this as a case study in the propagation of erroneous information that happens to resonate with some people's beliefs about Israel, and not as a deliberate attempt at propaganda or as an indictment of the integrity of those people who repeated it.  If a journalist or professor repeats a false quote that is often repeated, the facts are the facts - third party sourcing that it happened establishes as a weight / POV concern that those facts are noteworthy.   The earlier problem was that we did not have a good source.  Wikidemon (talk) 22:19, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

AN/I
I have referred the matter to AN/I here. There is ongoing edit warring across several articles, the WP:BLP/N discussion and talk page discussions have not stopped it, and we need to consolidate this in a single place. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 22:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Bogie -> Bogey
It appears his nickname was incorrectly recorded in the article as "Bogie", where it should be "Bogey" - as it's spelled in the Haaretz article. Any complaints/concerns to this change, please comment. GrizzledOldMan (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Currently there's nothing in the article itself about his nickname. Is there any reliable source about its origin and pronunciation? The Haaretz link is broken. Mcljlm (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

viruses
Ya'alon has never called the people of "peace now" "Virus". The things he said were distorted by the new. We had a big discussion about it at the Hebrew value. At the end of which all were convinced that he didn't. He explained the things he said on the new, also there were articles about it (links are on the Hebrew site). why shouldn't we change the value in English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.64.72.135 (talk) 11:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Moshe Ya'alon.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Moshe Ya'alon.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 24, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-06-24. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moshe Ya'alon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924021410/http://www.generalassembly.org/speakers/bio/minister-moshe-bogie-yaalon to http://www.generalassembly.org/speakers/bio/minister-moshe-bogie-yaalon
 * Added tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418626717&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Original surname
According to the Hebrew article נולד בשם משה סמולינסקי. At https://www.geni.com/people/Moshe-Bogie-Ya-alon/6000000002769727637 "Son of David Smilansky and Batia Smolainsky ... Brother of Zvi Gilad (Smolainsky)" appears. Various Hebrew sources have סמולנסקי, in English Smolansky. Other English sources have Smolinski. Is there a reliable source? Mcljlm (talk) 17:22, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:"Infobox member of the Knesset"
Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

English edition
Since דרך ארוכה קצרה The Longer Shorter Way has been translated - with the title The longer, shorter path - it would be useful for that to be cited for the 10 December 1992 incident rather than the Hebrew edition. Mcljlm (talk) 03:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)