Copyright (c) 1997 - Ingrid A. Rimland
"Israel has tried killing, beating, gassing, mass arrests, deportation, destruction of houses, curfews and other forms of harsh collective punishment. Nothing has succeeded in enforcing obedience or eliciting a violent response.
The Palestinian uprising is a remarkable feat of collective self-discipline. It is quite different from the struggle of the Jews of Palestine for a Jewish state, with the murder of British officials, the assassination of UN mediator Folke Bernadotte, the hanging of British hostages, and many atrocities against Arab civilians.
The current Prime Minister of Israel, commander of the group that assassinated Bernadotte, lauded terror as a moral imperative. 'Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat,' he wrote. 'First and foremost, terrorism is for us a part of the political battle being conducted under the present circumstances, and it has a great part to play . . . in our war against the occupier.'
Some would have us believe that such thoughts, and the practices that follow from them, were only the province of extremists, and were abandoned with the establishment of the state that the press describes as the 'symbol of human decency', 'a society in which moral sensitivity is a principle of political life' (New York Times), which has been guided by 'high moral purpose . . . through its tumultuous history' (Time). There is an extensive record to undermine such delusions.
Furthermore, the political leadership was reluctant to condemn terrorist practices. In laudatory reminiscences, Isaiah Berlin observes that Chaim Weizmann 'did not think it morally decent to denounce either the acts [of Jewish terror] or their perpetrators in public . . . he did not propose to speak out against acts, criminal as he thought them, which sprang from the tormented minds of men driven to desperation . . .'; David Ben-Gurion kept secret the confession of a close friend that he was among the assassins of Bernadotte.
National movements and struggles typically have a record of violence and terror, not least our own, and Israel is no exception to the norm. . ."
So what do we have today, almost ten years since these passages were written and with the passage of a law in Israel permitting torture as an instrument of obtaining "confessions" for the sake of political control over the Palestinians? Again, I am quoting from the March issue of "The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs":
Neve Gordon, on page 23:
"Torture is not only about controlling the victim, who more often than not will be unable to speak out for the rest of his or her life; it is also about controlling the population as a whole. . . . torture is not simply about inducing a person to speak, but rather it is about silence - ensuring that particular activities are broken and popular opposition remains suppressed. . . "
And Rachelle Marshall, getting more specific and graphic:
". . . Palestinian suspects are often confined inside a 4-foot high cupboard for long periods, or hooded and tied to a kindergarten chair, deprived of sleep and denied use of a bathroom. Since many of the prisoners given this treatment are physicians, teachers, and other professionals, it undoubtedly is aimed at stripping them of their dignity." (p.9)
So "Human Rights" means stripping prisoners of human dignity? Let's look at the city of Hebron, described as a place
". . . where the tomb of Abraham is sacred to both Muslims and Jews, (and which) has been the scene of almost every act of cruelty human beings can inflict on one another. . . ":
"The negotiations over Israel's long overdue withdrawal from Hebron were stalled for months because Netanyahu has crushed that hope, along with any remaining trust on the Palestinian's part in Israel's desire for a just peace. Throughout the protracted bargaining he and his government demonstrated what can only be called a master-race mentality, showing contempt for the Palestinians, for the validity of the peace accords, and for world opinion." (p. 9)
And, in the same article,
". . . In early December, Israeli forces in the city came up with a new refinement of cruelty that was virtually ignored in the US. Like Orthodox Jewish women, Muslim women put a high priority on modesty; it is important to both groups to keep their heads and arms covered in front of others. So it was a violation almost equivalent to rape when Israeli police and border guards descended on seven households in Hebron and forced the female inhabitants, including terrified children, to strip naked during a search for weapons. One woman had to stand for fifteen minutes in front of a male commander; another had to remain before an open window in full view of the street.
By striking at the deepest sensibilities of devout Muslims the Israelis may have hoped to provoke an act of retaliation that would justify their continued presence in the city. It's also true, however, that random and unnecessary searches have been an integral part of Israel's tactics, which are aimed at humiliating the Palestinians and breaking their spirits. Before the Intifada, bored soldiers frequently conducted midnight raids, ordering residents out of their homes, and forcing male heads of households to bark like dogs or perform other degrading acts in front of their children. (p. 9)
Furthermore, in a separate article in the same issue (page 22):
". . . The United States, we have seen, can never find anything wrong with Israel's actions. The massacre at Quana, the shooting by trigger-happy Zionist settlers of six- and seven-year-old children, the burning of Muslim places of worship, the brutal beating of innocent Palestinians condoned by Israeli courts count for nothing in the eyes of Clinton or the American media. Israel's treatment of Arab prisoners as well as of mentally handicapped Arabs , will, I am sure, shock Americans.
The bias that Clinton has displayed in the new appointment(s) of those who put Israel first and America second fails to startle us. But average Americans are oblivious to all this. While American social services are cut and reduced from every angle, the aid to Israel increases by leaps and bounds.
But Clinton and American foreign policy makers are living in a fool's paradise if they think that the oppressed people of the occupied lands are going to give up so easily. . . . It is important that saner elements in Israel realize that the days of superiority, arrogance and stubborn behavior are over. . . "
I think the criticism of the Clinton administration and "foreign policy makers" is altogether justified. The criticism of the simple folks - the good, kind, decent, just Americans - is not. They know what's going on. They know the source. They know more than you think. They hear the chant of "Human Rights" and they will tell you that the phrase is used for window-dressing and that they are now fed up to the hilt with being what Doug Collins has described as ". . . the world's premier sucker country."
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world: and that is an idea whose time has come."
(Victor Hugo)