Talk:The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism

About this book...

So...where is it's ISBN number? The sources that are provided do not actually state that he is the author, there are no sources to indicate who translated it or what the translation contains, and it isn't on the publisher's catalogue. If it was a notable book, sufficient that it needs a Wikipedia article, it would be in the catalogue, no? How many were produced? How was it distributed? In what way is this different from a printed and translated version of somebody's speech?

Not every book by an author is notable, and this one isn't meeting the threshold. Risker (talk) 16:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

• Mahmud 'Abbas, al-Wajh al-Akhar: al-'Alaqat as-Sirriya bayna an-Naziya wa's-Sihyuniya (Amman: Dar Ibn Rushd, 1984)
• National Library of Australia Catalog Bib ID 493205

per this, source: MEQ journal appears to me WP:RS for factual description, since it is is a peer reviewed, however it is clearly biased. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 18:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Verification needed templates

I've done a significant copy edit of this article to bring it closer to NPOV, remove the worst of the unacceptable sources, correct some errors, and improve the flow and readability.

I have added {{verify source}} templates to the English "quotes" from the Abbas thesis/book, because none of them identify who made the translation or what its provenance is; the information that we have is that it was published in Arabic, and originally written in Russian, so this is a rather crucial issue.

I've also added the same template to a quote that is reported to come from a newspaper interview, because it does not directly quote the interview itself, and the date of the interview is not provided by the reference source used; therefore, it's not really verifiable. Risker (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

On translations, according to Itamar Marcus: translation by Wiesenthal Center. And this is from 2003. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to remove {{verify source}} templates to the English book quotes, if you don't mind. BTW Arabic is very common language ;).

Erm, no. You need to be able to show that the specific quotes used in this article are from that specific translation. Do you have a copy of that translation available to you? (It would be great if you did, but I can't seem to find a reference to it in the SWC archives.) I know Arabic is a common language, but we're not talking about the language, we're talking about a specific book which so far we can only confirm is held by one reference library. (Good work on that, by the way. That reference was the key to verification here.) The references to the translations must be verifiable, and most of the places where those quotes come from don't state their source, so they need to be confirmed against the translation itself. Risker (talk) 00:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

A partnership It seems that the interest of the Zionist movement... quote translation is by Wiesenthal Center, according to Itamar Marcus in 2003. Should it have {{verify source}} templates? AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources are reliable sources unless proven otherwise. I don't see why verification is required, per WP:V we are not required to check the truthfulness of what reliable sources say. Marokwitz (talk) 06:07, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Use of reference sources

I have reverted the addition of a specific reference source here. The sentence, parsed simply, says "The 2007 report by Institute A says that Person B said statement C", and therefore the subject of the sentence is the 2007 report. A book written in 2003 cannot be used as a reference to verify what a 2007 report said. Because "statement C" is attributed to a living person, the BLP policy applies. That is an improper source for the sentence, and must be removed. Risker (talk) 23:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

No argument, that's why edit summary noted the fact of Efraim Karsh chrono precedence. I got edit conflict as I was tweaking attribution by adding him. He cites the article book directly and according to his wiki page he has background in Arabic. So there is a number of sources basically saying the same thing. Any thought on appropriate attribution? AgadaUrbanit (talk) 23:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that paragraph is turning into a mess again, and needs some major work. Let's see. First off, how about separating what Karsh says from what the SWC report says; one sentence for each of them. The Karsh sentence could start with "Efraim Karsh, writing in 2003, stated that..." The sentence on the SWC report could start with "A 2007 report published by the SWC concurred with Karsh, saying...." I strongly suggest that each of them only be referenced by the referred to sources; that is, the statements attributed to Karsh be referenced to his book, and those attributed to the SWC be referenced to that report. Because this is a negative statement about a living person (there aren't many people who concur with Faurisson, and I can't imagine many people suggesting that it's a good thing to do so), the attribution of such a statement has to be crystal clear (hence actually stating who the source is in the article), and adding other references that say more or less the same thing muddies the waters. I'll think more on the last part of that paragraph, which has become something of a mess as well, and needs to have direct references for the quotations. Risker (talk) 00:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

My impression the those sources basically say the same commenting on Raul Hilberg and Robert Faurisson, that's why I grouped them together and removed Stephen E. Atkins cited text. Go ahead, fix it. Your review and edits are welcome. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Poor quality of this article

It is amazing that an article about a book doesn't actually have any references to the book. Almost the entire article is based on claims made by a small number of hostile authors, whose claims were then parroted by other hostile authors. This is highly unsatisfactory, and it is hard to see the point of the article other than a political point. As it happens, I have access to this book. I don't read Arabic but I can bring copies of a limited number of pages if I know the page numbers. Do any of the sources that claim to know what the book says actually give page numbers? Zero^talk 01:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

On January 24, 2013, I have added some new information about the book and recent interview with Abbas on Lebanese T.V channel Al-Maydeen, which took place on early January 2013. In this interview Abbas reiterates some of the arguments he raised in his thesis, in contrast to former statements of him to Haaretz on 2003 (which was mentioned in the original article and thus, not removed). In addition, I added links to the Wikipedia articles on the Holocaust and the Yad Veshem Museum, in order to add some depth, counter arguments and proves about the Holocaust - which are already acknowledged with Wikipedia. Moreover, I added some information on contemporary usage by Israeli politicians over Abbas' statements, especially in light of the January 2013 polls in Israel. Miraculously my portion was quickly deleted without giving any explanation or stating any reservations ahead. I think it is very unprofessional, counterproductive and opposing to the Wikipedia spirit of spreading the knowledge and providing people with as much information possible.--ScottyNolan (talk) 14:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Very poor and very biased

This article is not professional, very biased and far from being objective and therefore harms Wiki's reputation as a reliable source of information. I think that this article should be erased immediately.

(Nolan, 2012) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottyNolan (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. It reads like a mudslinging article against a political opponent than a reference entry.142.229.90.134 (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Defiantly biased and completely ignores the Palestinians involvement in the holocaust. "In 1941, Haj Amin al-Husseini (The Mufti of Jerusalem/leader of the muslim Palestinians) met with Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joachim Von Ribbentrop and other Nazi leaders. He wanted to persuade them to extend the Nazis’ anti-Jewish program to the Arab world." He later assisted in organizing and recruiting Muslims into the Waffen-SS and other units. Wikipedia page: 13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar (1st Croatian)--Violet24 (talk) 04:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't think Al-Husseini is relevant for this article. Maybe Lehi's attempts to ally with the Nazis would be relevant for Abbas' claim. Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 01:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

A request to delete the article

As it is clearly seen form the discussion, the biased statments and poor quality of the article itself, there is a good reason why this should be deleted. (ScottyNolan (talk) 14:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC))

Article is not biased, But let's get the First Hand Citations

The calls to delete the article are not valid the article is not biased at all, as it clearly and fairly points out Abbas' view that people should rememebr he wrote his thesis during a time of war with Israel and he would not say such things today. In other words it is commendable that Abbas acknowledges his own bias today about a thesis he wrote in a very different era. The criticism that the citations are second hand and not from the book based on the thesis are fair enough, apparantly the book is available from Amazon see http://www.amazon.com/The-Other-Side-Relationship-Between/dp/5512017772 I'll get it and update the citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.117.211.159 (talk) 09:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC) 98.117.211.159 (talk) 09:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Coffeyrod 98.117.211.159 (talk) 09:36, 7 October 2012 (UTC)Coffeyrod

That "book" is just a dump of this Wikipedia article; don't waste your money. Zero^talk 11:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes I assume it is. But it would clear up the objection that the holocaust-denying elements of the article are not primary source references from Abbas' own work. Which I think was in fact your objection !

I don't see how a copy of this Wikipedia article clears up anything at all. Zero^talk 05:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Mufti of Jerusalem

Pay attention to this Wikipedia page about the Mufti of Jerusalem. "In April 1943, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, was invited by Berger to assist in organizing and recruiting Muslims into the Waffen-SS and other units." Abbas has recently praised him. Read this article by the Washington Times: Yasser Arafat: Nazi trained It seems that Abbas' Holocaust denials are just a way for him to divert attention from the Palestinians' involvement in the Holocaust. --Violet24 (talk) 04:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

This is not a discussion forum, and you are not allowed to edit here. Goodbye. Zero^talk 09:46, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me Zero, but I did not 'edit'. I did not change the article, even-though this article should not be on Wikipedia. Abbas is twisting facts to hide his direct links to the Holocaust. I have presented the facts and links. --Violet24 (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Abbas doesn't have any direct links to the Holocaust. His praising of the Al Husseini, who's role in the Holocaust is widely disputed, is not at all a 'direct link'. Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 03:20, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Zionists killing Jews?

Abbas said: "The Zionist movement led a broad campaign of incitement against the Jews living under Nazi rule to arouse the government's hatred of them, to fuel vengeance against them and to expand the mass extermination.” Abbas is right that there were Zionists who tried to get Jews safely out of Germany with their belonging. One of these arrangements was called "Haavara agreement" (Haavara means transfer). But to say that the Zionists were trying to get the Jews killed is ludicrous. You better come up with hard evidence backing up his claims, if you don’t want to get caught up in the Palestinian deception machine. If you do, Wikipedia will lose its credibility. --Rimon4837 (talk) 22:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

His claims are properly attributed to him; any claim that has received enough attention in reliable, notable sources, should be present in the article regardless of it's truth. If it was written as a fact then there would be a problem. Sepsis II (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

It is written as a fact and there is a problem. The title of the article is "The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism". Making it see as if this is a historical fact instead of an opinion. If they titled the article "Abbas believes that there was a relationship btw Nazism and Zionism", then it's just an opinion and doesn't need to be proven. Not only are his opinions not proven, but he changed his beliefs when he gained more political power. Like I said, the Zionists did try to save Jews by helping transfer them and their belonging to Palestine. but Abbas claims that the Zionists helped/planned the Holocaust with the Nazis because they wanted the Jews to die. Now, either get real sources (not Palestinian propaganda) or delete this ridiculous page. --Rimon4837 (talk) 01:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia strives to be neutral, to delete opinions or books due to one's dislike of the opinions or books would of course make wikipedia nothing more than propaganda or something similar to Conservapedia. Sepsis II (talk) 01:25, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

You are right, Wikipedia should be based on opinions and not facts. I bet you work for the Palestinian misinformation campaign. You are doing a great job! --Rimon4837 (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Please review Wikipedia's Policies and Guidelines, especially the assumption of good faith. Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 03:22, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Mahmoud Abbas denies the Holocaust

This is an incedible video in Hebrew (when I have time, I will translate) about Mahmoud Abbas views that are inspired by Nazi propoganda. Dr. Adi Cohen says that the book is only in Arabic (not translated) and still there on Abbas' official website, eventhough he has since claimed to have changed his views. --Orit49 (talk) 11:46, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

This is the video with the translation. The editors here should watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wm0uBRQtgGk --Violet24 (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Editing this page

Are you kidding me? I improved this page and used some of the latest research on this book. I used citation for every paragraph and then you deleted everything, even though this page is unclear and does not always have citation. I would like to know who is the editor of this page and who gave him the authority to decide what content will be on this page. --STI500 (talk) 00:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Arbitration Committee has ruled that only established editors can edit articles related to the Palestine-Israel conflict. You can read the details and the reasons at WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. You don't meet those requirements, ergo you aren't allowed to edit here. Strictly speaking you aren't allowed to edit this talk page either, but I'm not going to enforce that (though there's nothing I can do if someone else does). You seem to have a conflict of interest as well, as it was obvious that your edits served to promote your personal opinions. See WP:COI for the rules about that. Wikipedia editors are not allowed to use the encyclopedia to promote their opinions, but only to report the contents of "reliable sources". For this purpose it makes no difference whether you are a grade-school kid or an academic specialist. You need to spend time studying the key policies on how the encyclopedia works: WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS. The text you added was basically your opinion written as if it is Wikipedia's opinion, but Wikipedia does not have opinions. Zero^talk 06:45, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

It’s not an opinion, but a summary of the book, based on an Israeli professor's articles. Abbas’ book has no bibliography and you have to understand the historical background and reasons why both the Russians at the time and Palestinian authority would want to write this book, which is not based on facts, but a book clearly inspired by Adolf Eichmen’s Holocaust denial. But then, has anyone even read the book in Arabic, and what is a credible source? Who chose the editors for this page, who are they? And what you are basically saying is that you won’t accept the opinion of Israeli professors who actually read & researched the book. This is like saying the Jews cannot edit the "Mien Kamf book" page. It seems like it is you who may have some false narrative that you want to promote. Also, make it clear that only "established editors" can edit this page. It is misleading, since they asked for someone to improve the page and use citations, but you prefer no citation then ones from an Israeli article. Also, we have the right to know who are these "established editors" and what are their political objectives. Our goal is that people know the truth about this book and that is what Wikipedia needs to do; tell the truth rather than serving a political agenda. --STI500 (talk) 10:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

That isnt what he is saying. Who is the "we" and "our" in your comment? nableezy - 16:17, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I understand perfectly well what he isn’t saying.--STI500 (talk) 23:44, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok, do you understand what I am asking? Who is the "we" and "our" in your comment? nableezy - 00:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Look at my Talk page, you can ask me questions there.--STI500 (talk) 00:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Appears to be based on or plagiarised from a book by Faris Glubb

This seems to be based on a book published by Faris Glubb son of Sir John Glubb published in 1979, several years earlier than Abbas's thesis. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Zionist-Relations-Germany-Faris-Glubb/dp/0911026118/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509707889&sr=8-1&keywords=Faris+Glubb --Wool Bridge (talk) 11:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok? Your opinion doesn't really matter here. What matters is what has been said in published reliable sources. --Majora (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Wool Bridge, You need to provide evidence in the form of a reliable source before any of this can be included in the article. Zero^talk 01:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

"Portions of The Other Side have been considered as Holocaust denial by some critics"

In this article, it is affirmed that "In the doctoral thesis, Abbas describes the number of Jews murdered in the Nazi Holocaust as agreed upon by mainstream historians, six millions, as a 'fantastic lie'" and that "Abbas raised doubts regarding the existence of the gas chambers, quoting Robert Faurisson, on the nonexistence of gas chambers"

In the lead of the Holocaust denial article, it says, and I quite, "Holocaust deniers make one or more of the following false statements: Nazi Germany's Final Solution was aimed only at deporting Jews from the Reich and did not include their extermination; Nazi authorities did not use extermination camps and gas chambers for the genocidal mass murder of Jews; or the actual number of Jews murdered is significantly lower than the accepted figure of 5 to 6 million, typically around a tenth of that figure.

Even though one of these false statement's is sufficient to confirm that a book is denying the Holocaust, according to this article Abbas's work promotes not one but two of these false statements. Abbas also appears in the List of Holocaust deniers in the corresponding article.

Therefore I push to change the lead of this article, so it will make clear that Abbas's thesis and book engage in Holocaust Denial as a matter of undeniable fact. 12:40, 29 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mateo (talk • contribs)

The article must focus on the book and its thesis

I have edited the article, reorganizing it and adding material that presents the thesis of the book. In its previous state, the article focuses largely on the number of people killed in the Holocaust. While Abbas raises his doubts about the number of jews killed in the Holocaust this is NOT a central part of his thesis. His thesis: the Zionists were the secret partners of the Nazis in the Holocaust because they wanted to force jews to move from Europe to Palestine. The western powers chose to keep the zionist role in the Holocaust secret and brought only the Nazis to trial in Nuremberg. Since the article is is about the book it should focus on this thesis. Looking forward to your thoughts Utalempe (talk) 16:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Repetition.

In the section "Political controversy and Abbas' clarifications" there is a full paragraph just repeating the previous paragraph. It's the same interview with the same source and the exact same words. @Nableezy @Mifter

Look under the quote:

_{I wrote in detail about the Holocaust and said I did not want to discuss numbers. I quoted an argument between historians in which various numbers of casualties were mentioned. One wrote there were twelve million victims and another wrote there were 800,000. I have no desire to argue with the figures. The Holocaust was a terrible, unforgivable crime against the Jewish nation, a crime against humanity that cannot be accepted by humankind. The Holocaust was a terrible thing and nobody can claim I denied it.} AlikAlavi (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. Zero^talk 09:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

University name

I can't edit, but his university has reverted its name to the one used when he was there. Bra71l (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)