There Never Was A Massacre At Deir Yassin

While reviewing how different sites reported the 'Deir Yassin massacre' to prepare for a letter expressing my outrage to reading the article, "A Revolutionary Coincidence" by Marc Ellis (yet another 'jewish' traitor) (http://www.junity.org/resources/ellis.htm), I came across an apparent counter-article on an excellent website (the Jewish Delaware - http://www.jewishdelaware.esmartweb.com/) with the title: "Deir Yassin: History of a Lie March 9, 1998". Imagine how dismayed I was when I found myself reading an article perpetrating the very vile lies (and adding to them) that it was supposed to refute.


It turned out that the LINK was at fault, not the article or the website. The piece that had actually outraged me is called, "THE 1948 MASSACRE AT DEIR YASSIN REVISITED" by Matthew Hogan (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2082/2_63/72435149/print.jhtml) The link has now been corrected and I'm very happy to direct everyone to read the original article, "Deir Yassin: History of a Lie March 9, 1998" at its source (The Zionist Organization of America http://www.zoa.org/pubs/DeirYassin.htm) The only drawback is that it is long and detailed, but for anyone who wishes to learn all the truths and myths still surrounding Deir Yassin, it is well worth the time and effort (the same can be said about Jewish Delaware. )

I'm also happy to say that the ZOA document corroborated every one of the sources that I had found that refuted the atrocious falsehoods in all the so-called histories. Because my own piece is shorter and easier to read, I'll repeat it here (with the article in question given its correct name and some additional information.)

"THE 1948 MASSACRE AT DEIR YASSIN REVISITED" by Matthew Hogan (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2082/2_63/72435149/print.jhtml) is NOT historically accurate; in fact, it continues to perpetrate a vile lie against the Jews. As you can see from the ZOA article, every one of his 'sources' is suspect and/or has been proved false.

In the author's attempts to be fair, he gave too much credence to 'eyewitness' Arab testimony (an all too common occurrence.) I have been studying, teaching and writing about Jewish history for over 25 years and I've learned that Deir Yassin was no more of a massacre than Jenin was.

Here are some proofs:

The actual truth is, there were the same number of 'rapes' in Deir Yassin as there were 'buried corpses' in Jenin. I don't expect you to take my word for this; instead, I suggest you use another excellent link - The Jewish Virtual Library's page on Deir Yassin (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/deir_yassin.html) Their account matches the Irgun's version almost exactly (see the Irgun website, ETZEL's Deir Yassin page at: http://www.etzel.org.il/english/index2.html)

The village of Deir Yassin had an ugly reputation for violent sniper attacks on Jewish civilians for years before the battle in question took place. It was definitely not 'holding to a truce' as is claimed in that article. Just as it is highly unlikely (from a historical perspective) that the Jews would have killed Christ by CRUCIFYING him, when only the Romans killed people by that method, any thorough examination of the actions of the Arabs, especially those who were living along the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road that blockaded Jerusalem will demonstrate that NO ARABS in that area behaved as the reports claim the 'innocent' Deir Yassin villagers did!

There is no documented evidence of any 'peace pact' in Deir Yassin and there IS evidence of aggressive anti-Jewish activity there (Jerusalem: Capital of Israel http://www.jerusalemarchives.org/period4/4-13.html.) When I inquired as to any evidence of a truce in Deir Yassin to the researchers at The Truth (http://users.actcom.co.il/thetruth/patrioticEmail.htm), another resource site, I received this answer in reply: "I know of only one truce. It was signed (in Jerusalem) by the Jews of Mechor Haim neighborhood and the Arabs of Beit Safafa neighborhood in 1929 after the murderous Arab riots all over Palestine. This truce held up to the War of Independence."

But, the biggest reason to disbelieve the talks of 'peaceful Arabs in Deir Yassin' is the very fact that the attack on that particular village was performed as an organized military venture decided on by all the Jewish leaders acting together because Jerusalem was being strangled. The Jews had neither manpower nor ammunition to spare on frivolous raids and there were a multitude of dangerous 'hotspots' along that route (the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem Road) where Jews were being killed every day trying to bring supplies to besieged Jerusalem. They chose Deir Yassin specifically because that was the village that could best achieve its objective --- removal of a hostile enemy force on the vital lifeline of Jerusalem.

Deir Yassin was selected precisely because Arabs (both villagers and 'outside irregulars') were using it's position overlooking the main road (it is a natural ambush point -- look at the Map of 1947 Jerusalem (http://www.jerusalem-archives.org/period4/4-1.html) to fire on Jews in the vulnerable convoys. Any innocent, i.e., noncombatant Arabs, who were killed in that day lost their lives because the Arabs fought from a well-defended and well-prepared position (they were actually much better armed than the Jews) and deliberately used women and children as shields (which is an unfortunately too common practice of theirs.)

I don't know if you've ever read the book, Cast a Giant Shadow by Ted Berkman (the biography of Colonel Mickey Marcus) but if you haven't then I highly recommend it. It is one of the best accounts of what was going on in Palestine prior to the War of Independence that has ever been written and the books accounts corroborate everything in the sites I've mentioned (and belie those in articles like the one under discussion.)

While I will concede the possibility, even the probability, that some Irgun soldiers fired when they didn't absolutely have to (from fear or anger or whatever) a massacre couldn't have taken place because there were too many uninjured survivors (well over 100 people with no wounds at all.) Compare that to the defenseless Jews who were victims of the multiple Arab massacres, such as the 1929 Hebron Massacre (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/hebron29.html) The Arabs 'excuse' for those murders (and many others) was the same twisted false rumors of 'Jewish atrocities' that are used today to explain the homicide bombers' vile barbaric acts of mass murder of innocents. It was no truer in 1948 than it is today.

Many people, including such notorious Jew-haters as David Duke and Yasser Arafat, consider the fact that they have statements made by Jews themselves as bona-fide evidence of Jewish/Zionist perfidy. They don't just accept that traitors from ‘within the ranks’ have troubled Jews since Biblical times (that's why Isaiah specifically warned against them.) I've unfortunately come across literally hundreds of such traitors and Deir Yassin is a favorite 'whipping boy' topic. But, no matter who says it, even a 'Jewish expert' like Marc Ellis, it's still a lie!

It is a blot on Jews everywhere that there are still so many places that promote these vicious lies which are used by Israel's enemies despite massive amounts of evidence disproving all of the allegations. Possibly the worst of these sites is called Deir Yassin Remembered (http://www.deiryassin.org/).

These false accounts of 'Jewish atrocities' do not become 'verified' just because a Jew states them but they do become more dangerous! See what David Duke has to say about Deir Yassin on his home page AND WHO HE CITES AS EXPERTS at http://www.duke.org/ (or at any one of the 240 sites where his article on that subject is published and/or cited including the notorious Radio Islam http://abbc.com/duke/04.htm) and you'll see what I mean.

I hope that this essay has brought the truth about Deir Yassin just a little bit closer to the forefront of people's minds.

JWD - Jewish Watchdog
If you have reached this page through a search engine, visit our main page by clicking on the above link.