Talk:Avraham Stern

POV

A very very one-sided article that violates all the NPOV rules. Phrases like "freedom fighter" (for someone who attacked a civilian bus - btw his name was Shlomo, not Moshe) are unacceptable. Some of it is whitewash, like the WWII paragraph that fails to mention Stern's repeated attempts to negotiate an agreement with the Axis that involved Lehi fighting for the Nazis? In fact, why is he "Yair" and not "Stern" as an encyclopedia should have? This article reads like it was written by his mother. Btw, he was probably murdered but he was not tied up first. He was shoved towards the window and "shot while trying to escape". -- bdm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.51.32.148 (talk • contribs)

Hello again. Orignally the piece was published by the publishing company Hotza'at Yair in Israel, and the original text was written by Israel Eldad. It is I who translated it into ENglish from the original Hebrew, and I thought there would be no problem with publishing my own tranlsation, however the English version is about to be published as well. It is therefore that I decided to remove the article. --Yiftach Ofek —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.128.73 (talk • contribs)

There's still some POV stuff here: "He was executed for his role as leader of the Lehi" but I'm going to leave it. Jhobson1 13:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Moving to talk

Avraham Stern's memorial day is attended every year by Israeli political and government officials. IOW, Israeli officials are accused of memorializing a terrorist.

Proof please? Humus sapiens 06:48, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Stern is treated as national hero across a wide spectrum of Israeli politics (not only the right). I've seen his annual memorial on TV, though it was quite a few years ago. There were certainly politicians there. Don't forget that a considerable number of Knesset members are the children of people (until recently, the people themselves) who were in the Irgun or Lehi in 1948, and of course don't forget that Stern's disciple Shamir even got to be Prime Minister. From the 1950s onwards there was a gradual "rehabilitation" of the image of the Irgun and Lehi, accelerating for obvious reasons in the Menachem Begin period. I'll find a picture of the Stern commemorative stamp... --Zero 07:31, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I apologize. Guess I'll have to eat my hat now. Humus sapiens 07:53, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

it's all relative... it's in the middle, he should have been treated as national hero of course since he played a large part in Israel's independence from the British, but during most of the years Mapai's powers clouded his memory as well as all history of the underground groups. This has gradually changed but he's still not a pivot in Israeli politics and usually you won't find too many prominent Israelis on his grave on memomrial day - in fact, not even on Begin and Zabotinsky recently after Kadima's creation. Amoruso 13:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Says a lot about the modern State of Israel and contemporary Zionism when they officially celebrate a terrorist who targeted innocent civilians and sought an alliance against the British with Nazi Germany. While Britain fought the Nazis in Europe and North Africa, and Hitler was exterminating the Jews, Stern and his gang blew up civilian buses, murdered British troops and attacked Arab villagers in the name of Israel. And then he knocked on Hitler's door. Israeli kids don't have a chance. 80.6.30.24 02:14, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Arabs in the Stern Gang?

This I find extraordinarily hard to believe, and I am going to delete it until someone gives a good source. Also, I think it is quite problematic if we use a piece by Eldad for Wikipedia's article on Stern (see discussion above). Wasn't Israel Eldad one of the most influential ideologues and members of this group? Would we use an article by Abu Jihad for the article on Yassir Arafat? I think not. I will also rephrase the paragraph on the death/murder of Stern, for better neutrality. Arre 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't find it so impossible and I have seen it in other places. However, it can stay out until an actual citation is found. --Zero 23:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, not impossible, but since they were a virulently anti-Arab terrorist group, it doesn't seem very likely either. But of course there's exceptions to the rules. Some Jews on the anti-Zionist lunatic fringe support the PFLP too. But that is such a marginal thing, just as I suspect this would be, that it hardly deserves mentioning. And if it does, it has to be phrased in such a way that it is not misunderstood to mean that PFLP support among Jews (or Stern support among Arabs) is an essentially normal thing, albeit uncommon. Arre 02:15, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

It should be noted that the Lehi wasn't anti-arab at all but simply anti-british.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.213 (talk • contribs)

removed "terrorist"

- POV.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.213 (talk • contribs)

Disambig needed

There was also a 19th century Polish Jewish poet of that name...-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  08:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hazani

Brief bio of Moshe Hazani published with his article: "MOSHE HAZANI, PHD, is a lecturer in the Department of Criminology and the Interdisciplinary Department of Social Sciences at the Bar Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel. He received his Ph.D. from the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, for a study focusing on psychohistory. His major field of interest is deviance related to extreme worldviews, such as religiously sanctioned terrorism, racism and its manifestations, genocide (Nazi, communist, and western), and crimes committed by people involved in revolutionary movements. Dr. Hazani is also a columnist in the Israeli press." Anyone reading the article will immediately see that my summary of it is extremely conservative. Hazani in fact argues that the thanatophilia (love of death) Stern shared with the Nazis was one of the things that attracted him to the possibility of a German alliance. I may yet add more of Hazani's theories to the article. --Zero^talk 04:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't seem of any interest to this article. Perhaps it belongs in an article about Hazani. When I have the time I'll write a complete biography of Yair, this is a short summary and there's no room for psychoanalysis here or fringe articles concerning his mind when there are many people still living who actually know the person. He was always willing to die for his cause, it's true. Amoruso 10:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Executed

Are there an other sources about how Stern died? Thanks, --Tom 15:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

There is the British version and the Lehi version. The one in the article is an extreme Lehi version (usually the handcuffs are absent from the story). Obviously both versions should be presented, but until now this has not been possible due to pov-pushers. --Zero^talk 09:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

My grandmother-in-law was present at the shooting of Stern. Although we have diametrically opposed political views, I do not think that she is lying when she states that Stern was handcuffed before being shot. She does not claim that he was shot from behind. I'm trying to give the reference, but there is a difficulty with typing and formatting Hebrew in references in English text; I'll have another go later. משה וטובה סבורעי, מאצ"ל ללח"י , הוצאת המחברים, שקד 1989 , עמ׳356-63 Since this is an obscure source, I could scan the relevant pages and link to them, if someone would tell me how. RolandR 14:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There is only one version. Morton, Stern's murderer, admitted eventually that he killed Stern from behind.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.166.54 (talk • contribs)

Is there a source for this?JohnC (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

There is no objective source available. It should at least be noted in the article that it is alleged that he was murdered. I find it interesting that the death of a terrorist is assumed to be murder, and condemned, yet the killings of innocent people by the same terrorists is represented elsewhere as executions.JohnC (talk) 07:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I am concerned that the lengthy quote from Tova Svorai is under WP:SCHOLARSHIP a Primary source. I suggest that it should be removed, and a secondary source found. RegardsPngeditor (talk) 08:42, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 10:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

latest revisions

Please refer to the page of Lehi(group) before (wrongly) reverting this page again. First of all, Mass reverting is not allowed. And during the revisions, information such as the hebrew word for immigration to the homeland of Israel was deleted. This is not an allowed behavior on wikipedia. Secondly, the idea that Lehi referred to itself as a terrorist organization based on a false quotation put in by someone who didn't even read the source, lest the original source, is pure WP:OR. The german proposal also has been discussed in length at the appropriate article, which refutes some of the unequivocal statements appearing here. Amoruso (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Take up your complaints with David Yisraeli,who first cited the material in his doctorate at Bar Ilan University in 1974, The Palestine Problem in German Politics, 1889-1945.Nishidani (talk) 17:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Your childish reply has nothing to do with the issues I'm afraid. Amoruso (talk) 20:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not interested in your fears. Your attempt to edit the documentary record and remove information that is well-known, and frequently cited in scholarship, consists of pretexts based on false claims about ostensible WP:OR violations. Reporting what a Stern gang text says of its terroristic methods does not constitute original research, but simply annotates the facts.Nishidani (talk) 09:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

One article, unsigned and unknown who wrote it, does not prove anything. Taking anything from it and using it in a blatant childish and pov-warrior-like way constitutes WP:OR and a grave violaton of wikipedia guidelines. Repeating information that you've never seen more than once in the same article is also POV pushing. Such behavior will not be tolerated. Amoruso (talk) 12:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Such behaviour will not be tolerated. By whom? You are the recent editor to take exception with the edit, and your reasons show you are not familiar with the books from which that material is taken. Nothing you write in here makes much sense, so I presume you are grasping at straws to remove information you personally dislike.Nishidani (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying you read that work ? that you are familiar with the subject ? Please don't resort to that... With all due respect, the situation of the german proposal is already explained, in detail, in the Lehi (group) article. The article mentioning the word "terror" is also mentioned there. It's difficult therefore to presume WP:AGF here although I'm really trying to. If your sole objective is to insert words like "terrorist" or other words to stain the article, then I think you're not contributing to the article, and you should take it elsewhere. Amoruso (talk) 01:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes I've read the work. Lehi and Stern described their acts as as 'terroristic' and therefore, on wiki rules, they can be described as 'terrorists'. It's as simple as that. Nishidani (talk) 10:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, you just proved that you're lying. That's because they've never done that. There's only one unsigned article. In fact, Shamir has written specifically that their acts can not be called terroristic, therefore it's also contradictory to fact. Amoruso (talk) 15:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Your objection is based on what you perceive to be the truth, i.e. your OR. We are not to judge the truth of sources, but to give verifiable sources of reliable quality, which both Yisraeli and Brenner (to note but two of many historians who use that document) are. Go read the rulebook.Nishidani (talk) 15:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You're not adding anything new to the article but misquoting (the terrorist issue). Amoruso (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Same dispute moved to Lehi (group)

There I refuted the allegation of the terrorist "admission", which is an WP:OR anyway. Please refer to there. Amoruso (talk) 03:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

POV tag on death section

The article gives only the Lehi version. It should give the British version as well, and mention how Morton won at least 3 lawsuits over the issue. Zero^talk 12:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Trying to fix this, but better sources for the Lehi version are needed. The given source (Golan) does not support the previous text. It does not say "then shot from behind", nor does it say he was handcuffed, only that handcuffs had been brought. Zero^talk 15:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

The detailed investigation by Ian Black that I have cited covers more bases than anything else I have read. I can't find it on the web, but I can email a copy to anyone who asks. Zero^talk 15:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Bernard Stamp

The following was recently added: "The policeman whose gun was trained on Stern until Morton arrived, Bernard Stamp, said in a 1986 interview broadcast on Israel Radio, that Morton's account was 'hogwash.' According to Stamp, Morton pulled Stern from the couch on which he was sitting, 'sort of pushed him, spun him around, and Morton shot him.'" This is a correct report of what appears in the book "Stern: The Man and his Gang" by Zev Golan (Yair Publishing, 2011). Golan cites "Bernard Stamp, interview with Ilana Zur, broadcast on Israel radio, November 29, 1986. Audiocassette in archives of Lehi Museum, Tel Aviv."

I have misgivings about this.

1. "Yair Publishing" is hardly an independent publisher but appears to exist for the purpose of publishing adulatory material on Lehi and Lehi people.
2. Golan's book has many features that make it suspect. Eg. (1) the contact with Nazi Germany is whitewashed, (2) no mention of independent academic studies of Lehi, such as Heller's, (3) in general only adoration is expressed for Stern; I could not find a single critical word.
3. Ian Black's 1992 article in The Guardian is based on a memoir of Stamp "published here for the first time". Black also interviewed multiple concerned people including Stern's brother and Stamp's widow who would surely have mentioned such a radio interview of Stamp, but there is no mention of it in Black's 4000-word article. Nor any mention anywhere else I can find.
4. On page 44 Golan says Stamp found Stern in the closet standing with his head slightly bowed, but in the notes he admits Stamp actually said that Stern was crouching down (which is what Black also says about Stamp's testimony) and claims that Stamp was "exaggerating Stern's helplessness". So Golan admits adjusting his source, presumably in order to preserve the dignity of Stern. This is not the behavior of a respectable historian. What else about Stamp's testimony did he adjust?

Zero^talk 11:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I have looked for this interview via a Hebrew Google search. Although I have found a few references to it, there does not seem to be a link to the interview itself, or to a transcript. In any case, it would seem that this is a disputed account between two self-interested witnesses (Morton and Stamp). There were no independent witnesses, and no way of knowing which account is truthful. All we can do is note both accounts, and also that Morton has won four (I think) libel actions over this, including one against Menahem Begin. RolandR (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A new book on Stern, "The Reckoning" by Patrick Bishop, has a lot more about Stamp's interview including a longer transcript. This confirms that Stamp definitely testified that Morton shot Stern in cold blood. On the other hand, it confirms my suspicion that Golan has elided everything Stamp said that might embarrass his hero. Here is what Golan reported regarding Stamp's interview:

[Stamp's] hand came into contact with Stern, who was standing well hidden behind the clothes, his head slightly bowed within the constraints of the closet height. "There we were, there he was... He was not in a position to do anything even if he wanted to," according to Stamp. (Golan, p44, ellipses in original).

Here is Bishop's longer report of the interview:

[The detectives] reached in among the hanging clothes. They "pulled these aside—they parted quite easily". Then they saw him, "a man, crouching on the ground. A man helpless, unarmed, barefoot. He was in his underwear. I saw he had a pair of pants on and he had a vest one. That was all. He had nothing else on him." More than forty years on, Stamp's voice still rang with the drama of the event. "There we were and there he was. And what could he do? There was this fella crouching there, terrified out of his wits. Two policemen standing over him. They were armed...he's crouching down. He can't do anything. He's not in a position to do anything even if he wanted to. To us he was harmless." (Bishop, p242, ellipsis in original)

From this evidence I can't support Golan as a reliable source. Bishop identifies several problems with Stamp's evidence and judges it "powerful" but "not conclusive". If Stamp was lying, it wasn't because of admiration for Stern or he would have omitted the part about Stern crouching on the ground terrified in his underwear. Zero^talk 09:56, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Incidentally, Bishop reports that Ian Black's article in the Guardian was severely cut by the lawyers. That's why it omitted the key part of Stamp's testimony despite promising otherwise in the introduction. Zero^talk 10:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a checkable reference for the actual interview with Bishop? I'd like to compare his statements with those of Tovah Svorai in her memoirs. RolandR (talk) 10:40, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Bishop's citation is just "Ilana Tsur, Interview with Bernard Stamp". He doesn't say where he got it, but in the acknowledgements he mentions personal assistance from Tsur so I suppose that is it. Or he could have listened to the recording that Golan says in the Jabotinsky Archives , which he also acknowledges. Incidentally the bits quoted by both Golan and Bishop are so close in words that they must be looking at the same English original or English translation. Zero^talk 13:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Name Yair

This has recently been added, based on an assertion made in the Economist: "Stern's nickname, Yair, is still chosen by many Israeli's as a name for their sons". This is a broad claim with no evidence, despite the reference in the Economist. In fact, the name Yair is a biblical name and has been common among religious and secular Jews for many centuries. See: http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/172095/jews-named-yair-arent-named-after-a-terrorist for further information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.47.135 (talk) 04:01, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I sympathise with this comment very much. The Economist's claim is only true because it uses the weasel word "many" that could mean anything from dozens to thousands. Within the rules, we can take two paths here. We can add the response from Tablet Magazine, which is just as admissible as the Economist book review, or we can delete the claim altogether. I vote for deleting it altogether; what do other people think? Zero^talk 05:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I add that nobody knows in these "many" what percentage would name their son "Yair" in commemoration of Avraham Stern and not in reference to Yair Nitzani or Yair Lapid. We should delete this on the basis that "exceptional claims require exceptional sources". Pluto2012 (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 February 2023

Jewish paramilitary organization Irgun. In September 1940, Stern founded a breakaway militant Jewish American group named STERN, called the "Stern Gang" by the British authorities and by the mainstream in the Yishuv Jewish establishment.[1] The STERN was an anti-Nazi fighting group, that was led by Americans and the UK, was funded to combat the Nazi ideology that started in Egypt. Nazism was of French and Egyptian ideologies, that favored immigration for a Nazi plunder - organized looting - of European countries, and was often perpetrated by those favoring radical and worker-oriented unionist movements -- radical labor organizations. 2603:8080:6D03:469:A97C:9DB9:4EFD:B98F (talk) 08:03, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done Complete nonsense. Zero^talk 11:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Gov't participating in annual ceremony?

I found the paragraph stating that the ceremony

"attended by Israeli politicians and government officials is held each year..."

A) The Times of Israel source says nothing of the kind. It's from 2012, and it notes that that year nobody one might have expected did show up.

B) Not before Begin brought the Right to power in 1977, I'm sure. After that, maybe, but unsourced.

So I took it out. Looks like "true believers" are still around - and editing out of conviction & wishful thinking. Arminden (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)