Syrian forces took משמר הירדן MIŜMAR HA-YARDEN.

The institutional history of פלמ״ח PALMAḤ explicitly distinguishes the 6 June attack from the locality's fall on 10 June. It describes local Bedouin scouts entering afterward to inspect Syrian deployment. Their activity is evidence that military cooperation crossed communal boundaries, not a reason to transfer responsibility for the invasion to every Arab resident.¹

A United Nations memorandum written on 15 June records competing accounts of the line at the ceasefire deadline. The Syrian representative placed the crossing, encirclement and seizure of prisoners on 10 June. The Israeli representative described fighting continuing on 11 June. That later dispute does not erase the established 10 June fall; it prevents treating all combat in the sector as finished that afternoon.²

The Syrian representative's later account claimed 72 prisoners. It is a belligerent statement recorded by an observer, not a nominal count independently accepted here. The brief inherited article's claim that the army destroyed the locality lacked a complete account of buildings, people and stages. Taking the locality, killing defenders, taking prisoners and later destruction must be documented separately.

The reviewed sources do not provide a complete death roll, evacuation order or household register for 10 June. They therefore support the fall and loss of access, while leaving the precise civilian and military outcomes to person-level evidence.

The dispute concerned whether Syrian forces had advanced beyond the line they held at the operative deadline and whether an Israeli detachment could remain at a nearby farm. The later A truce-line ruling preserved the opposing positions. records the observer's ruling. A battlefield loss and a subsequent decision about truce lines are different events, requiring different dates and evidence.

The continuing Syrian occupation mattered because the front was not merely a line on a map. It separated the community from the places in which its homes and institutions had stood.

10 June 1948 is the source-supported civil date. Its daytime conversion is ג׳ בסיון ה׳תש״ח 3rd 𝑜𝑓 Sivan, AM 5708; after local sunset the date is ד׳ בסיון ה׳תש״ח 4th 𝑜𝑓 Sivan, AM 5708. Institutional history and the later Syrian account support the civil date. The hour of the locality’s fall is unresolved; the route is a provisional daytime conversion. The 11 June fighting and the 15 June observer ruling remain separately dated. ³

• Why must the repelled 6 June assault remain distinct from the 10 June fall?
• What does a belligerent’s prisoner estimate establish without a nominal register?