Talk:Transfer Committee

issues
I don't read this the way it is written in the lede. "...aim of overseeing the removal of Palestinian Arabs from their towns and villages, and preventing their return." On page312 of Morris he says the main purpose was "to focus on measures that would assure that there would be no return." While not denying that Morris claims that the committee was in favor of further Arab transfer, this was an "advise" function only. Further on the page, it refers to another member of the committee who refers to: "ways to carry out the transfer of the Arab population at this opportunity when it has left its normal place of residence." I don't believe the lede makes this clear at all.

Oh and yes I changed "Palestinians" to "Palestinian Arabs" since that is how they were known at the time, and both Palestinian Jews and Arabs were known as Palestinians at the time. Stellarkid (talk) 20:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm not sure I follow your point. The aim of the committee was to remove, prevent return, and destroy villages, and indeed Weitz's agents had started doing it. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 20:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, that was fast! My point is that the main focus was on resettlement or "preventing their return."   The implication of the way it is now written is that they were aiming to throw out those who were still there.  Actually they were mainly focused on consolidating their military gains, and on the fact that the Arabs had already left.  In other words, I don't get (see in Morris) the "overseeing the removal" part.  Just the "preventing their return" part.  Stellarkid (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I see what you mean. I can take a look through the sources later, if you like (though it might be tomorrow), or you could edit the lead to reflect what you've said. I'm fine either way. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 21:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi yes, SlimVirgin, I have been looking Morris over on this and it seems there was actually an initial (unofficial) committee under Weitz but it was not approved by Ben Gurion. That was disbanded then replaced with a later (official) one "with a more restrictive focus" a bit later that was approved.  This was all during the war itself, and then apparently there was a fair bit of opposition to it within the Jewish political community, particularly the left wing  -- with respect to the destruction/demolition part, and then they disbanded.  In my reading of Morris the committee really didn't do too much (from the perspective of the Jews at least) damage.  But yes I will look it over again and make sure my info is correct and properly sourced. I'm busy too so it may be a bit.  Thanks,  Stellarkid (talk) 03:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, sounds good. :) SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 12:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am confused- why does the quote have brackets: "He does not agree to the [existence] of our temporary committee" I mean, what other word besides existence could go in htere such that someone would need brackets? Rakovsky (talk) 23:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Efraim Karsh strongly criticizes Morris and even claims that he distorted quotes and misinterpreted them. I hate to place my head between these two respectable historians, but in such a sensitive issue, Karsh's view should be given much more place. 109.66.123.252 (talk) 14:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)