Talk:2017 Jerusalem truck attack

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Removing the links to Berlin and Nice[edit]

Firstly because there's no clear evidence as of yet that the perpetrator is affiliated with Islamic state. Secondly because both of those attacks were against soft civilian targets, whereas this one was targeting military personnel and therefore can be seen as a legitimate operation in the military sense. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 22:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
ISIS is one of the two groups attributed that are suspected, the Israeli Prime minster and media had put the finger on them. WP:RS connect the events to Nice and Berlin attacks5.144.59.157 (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Bibi Netanyahu clearly wants to claim that Palestinians in general are "in league" with ISIS, as per the Likudnik-Settler narrative. His claiming as much, and certain Israeli news outlets claiming as much, doesn't make it so. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bibi has lied many times in the past in order to benefit from tragedies, any statements from him must be attributed and should not be written as simple fact. 2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (talk) 23:59, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removing links to "Israel"[edit]

Jerusalem is not universally considered to be part of Israel proper. It's, at the least, "disputed" in terms of status. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is POV push as Jerusalem is Israel capital (chosen by Israel), see Positions_on_Jerusalem5.144.59.157 (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's simply going by international consensus. Only Israel and the pro-Israel movement claim Jerusalem as the capital of the Israeli state proper. I'm removing those links again in light of this fact.76.64.142.227 (talk) 23:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The international consensus is that East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. The attack did not occur in Israel, but to Israeli troops in occupied Palestinian territory. 2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"International consensus" is largely pushed by muslim nations who hate Israel on principle.74.70.146.1 (talk) 17:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
East Jerusalem is technically not part of the "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (oPt) - areas A,B,C of the Oslo Accords, now mostly referred to as "State of Palestine" by the UN. Of course Arab Nations don't recognize Israeli sovereignity claim on E. Jerusalem and it is often named "Occupied Jerusalem", but it is not technically part of the oPt (or now State of Palestine).GreyShark (dibra) 08:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334: ″Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law..". Whatever the Oslo Accords say, the highest international body is very clear in re-affirming that this territory is viewed as occupied, under international law. Israel effectively annexed it by its law in 1980, which perhaps should be mentioned.Axxxion (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting controversies[edit]

WP:RS reported that, got national and international coverage. 5.144.59.157 (talk) 23:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No international sources has been presented yet. Honest Reporting is not a RS or a source or importance, they are strictly a pro-right-wing-Israel advocacy group, here they are a WP:SPS. Really, these guys are complaining about bias for articles with titles like "Four killed in lorry attack on Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem". That is what one would expect when reading the raving rants of a random blog. I'm sure we could find sources like these to claim the media/others are a bunch of anti-Semites on any article related to Israel but we don't include it because it would be WP:UNDUE just like this whole section is. Here's hoping the war is over by Christmas so everyone can return home. 2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Proposal: removing links to "terrorism"[edit]

Israeli soldiers are not civilians. They are a belligerent, hostile, occupying power in the occupied West Bank. I fail to see how an attack on armed combatants and belligerents constitutes "terrorism" unless you're blatantly pushing a POV narrative. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 00:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Targeting belligerent, hostile soldiers is also not "mass murder" unless you consider two sides killing one another in a conventional battle to be "mass murder" as well. Removed link. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 00:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Same opinion. The act has by no means accorded the definition of "terrorism".Koala0090 (talk) 23:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Reporting controversies" section necessary?[edit]

Is the Reporting controversies section really needed? I hope i do not sound rude but Honest Reporting often takes issues with mainstream news organizations, and there is not much to suggest that this time the news byline Honest Reporting is upset about makes is more notable than most. Just because the event is notable does not mean that the reactions to it are. Inter&anthro (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained to the Israeli IP why it's not appropriate but they keep re-adding it. 2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (talk) 03:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm removing it again. Also going to remove links to "Israel", "mass murder", "terrorism", "ISIS", etc. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 18:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talpiot[edit]

I reverted an edit by User: 209.171.88.156 with Edit summary "It happened in a settlement in the oPt". In my revert summary I refer to Talpiot#History reading: "After the Israeli War of Independence, Talpiot became the frontier, surrounded by Jordanian-occupied East Jerusalem, although Israelis continued to live there." That is, it remained part of Israel. I repeat this information here as the Edit summary location is likely to be superseded by subsequent edits on this page. -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't this happen in East Talpiot though? There is a pretty big difference. - GalatzTalk 18:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Reverting both of your edits. It's clearly something that happened in the occupied Palestinian West Bank; not in Israel. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read WP:ARBPIAINTRO, as you are not allowed to edit this page. It appears that the page is now protected, which will not allow you to make the edits. If you wish to contribute to the conversation, please state your case, and an independent person from the subject can draw the conclusion and make the appropriate edit, if needed. - GalatzTalk 19:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly? anything but. The attack took place at the Armon Hanatziv promenade, which is located in an area that was, in fact, neither Israeli nor Jordanian prior to 1967. It was in no-man's land, between the two, and held by the UN. Therefore, while not in Israel proper, neither is it in "occupied Palestinian West Bank". Let's just leave it in Jerusalem. Poliocretes (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This was done at the Armon HaNatziv promenade which start at the Talpiut and continue up to Abu Tor, there is also a building called Armon Hantiziv, a Neighborhood and a mountain ridge with that name 37.19.116.113 (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Naftali Bennett response to the event[edit]

"Yup, BBC. Driver--not terrorist--shot. He only "allegedly" murdered 4 Israelis." https://twitter.com/naftalibennett/status/818075256451690496/photo/1 37.19.116.113 (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why should anyone care about the twitter account of Kahanist sociopath and naked mole rat Bennett?
Against. His pathetic sputtering about "terrorism" (which this isn't) in public can suffice. Don't need to add a link to his twitter. 76.64.142.227 (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Argentine government condemns[edit]

We should add that the argentine government condemned the attack, as it was stated on their website. -- Juandedeboca "All men dream... but not equal" 22:06 9 January 2017 (UTC)

The Head of New York City Students for Justice in Palestine reaction[edit]

We should add that the the Head of New York City Students for Justice in Palestine cheered for the attack, as reported by algemeiner37.19.119.234 (talk) 09:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barring the fact that there's nothing wrong in supporting the attack-- as it's a military operation against a military target, and thus legitimate-- the alleged reaction (your "source" isn't objective, lol) by one advocacy group in another country has nothing to do with the event itself. Totally unacceptable to add, especially when we consider your "source".
Anyways-- here's to more of the same for as long as Israel continues the occupation. Cheers! 76.64.142.227 (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Condemnation by Turkey[edit]

There was an unusual tweet by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek that I think should be added to the "reaction" section:

"Again we condemn another despicable act of #terrorism -today in #Jerusalem. Humanity deserves nations to unite against terrorism w/o excuses" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.137.168.178 (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Natenyahu[edit]

Of course Natenyahu blames the Islamic State, guaranteeing quick strong international sympathy. Unsurprisingly, nothing is mentioned in the lead about the group that claimed responsibility for this heinous attack. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

it took 10 minutes to search, and see that ISIS affiliated sources claim him as their follower - Al Hak (ISIS affiliated ) http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/Data/articles/Art_21130/H_010_17_79490171.pdf pages 3 and 4 (screenshots + text) , http://www.memri.org.il/media/sal/articles/Terrorist12.png (from memri) , Center Abn Temya (ابن تيمية) from gaza (http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/6397/SyqwAE.jpg) 37.19.119.13 (talk) 13:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
you are welcome to enter this information in the lead (if that does not interfere with some kind of an agenda)37.19.119.13 (talk) 13:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
These are primary sources. ISIS's warmongering Wahhabi affiliates would be more than ecstatic to claim responsibility as this would bring praise to the group from some. No agendas here, get a secondary source. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Memeri and ITIC are secondary sources (ITIC says it's not an official claim but that still counts).37.19.119.13 (talk) 14:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
someone added in the lead the obscure group claim, but did not add PFLP responsibility claim him as their member " الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين تزف رفيقها الشهيد فادي قنبر، وتؤكد أنه أحد عناصرها، وهو منفذ عملية الدهس في القدس المحتلة." https://twitter.com/PalHadath/status/818127028553707521 37.19.119.13 (talk) 14:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No they are not secondary sources, they are a collection of primary sources as their is no commentary, it is just translated primary material. I read Arabic, the quote confirms that the attacker is from the PFLP. But we need secondary sources that mention this. Anyone can claim responsibility, heck I can claim responsibility. Bibi can say whatever he wants, but if facts refute what he says, then no he cannot say whatever he wants. Unless anyone is a fan of living far from reality. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
have you actually looked in the PDF ? It has 19 pages of commentary, and it checked the claims and the possibility they are credible or not 37.19.119.13 (talk) 16:10, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Islamic terrorism in 2017[edit]

Please add it to the category list.--Rævhuld (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2017_Jerusalem_truck_attack&oldid=1196734668"