...IFPB delegates return to their communities with a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the conflict and its multiple dimensions. Such a nuanced understanding, aids their activism and engagement with the issue. A typical IFPB delegation features programming on some of the following issues.
Palestinian African Community
Israeli Black Panther Party
Members of Israeli settlements in the West Bank
The Association for Ethiopian Jews in Israel
Bedouin communities in Israel and the West Bank
Palestinian Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons
The Palestinian Fair Trade Association and Farmer’s Collectives
Druze communities in the Golan Heights
Yad Vashem: The Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority
Nonviolent Movements:
Bil’in Village Popular Committee
Nabi Saleh Village Popular Committee
Youth Against Settlements
Wi’am Palestinian Conflict Resolution Center
Other Voice (Sderot)
Women in Black
Tent of Nations
Holy Land Trust
Women's Leadership:
Jerusalem Center for Women
Isha L’Isha
New Profile
The Coalition of Women for Peace
Women’s Center for Legal Aid and Counseling
Palestinian Women’s Collectives
Analysis and Advocacy:
Mossawa: Center for the Rights of the Arab Citizens of Israel
B’Tselem: Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories
Grassroots AlQuds
BADIL: Palestinian Center for Residency and Refugee Rights
Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel
Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions
Alternative Information Center
Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
Boycott National Committee
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Palestinian Hydrology Group
Alternative Israeli Voices:
Zochrot
Rabbis for Human Rights
Physicians for Human Rights
Hebrew University Students
Gvanim Association (Sderot)
Leaders
Rabbi Joseph Berman is the Government Affairs Liaison for Jewish Voice for Peace. Joseph has organized for justice and equality for Palestinians and Israelis for over a decade, including a number of years when he lived in Israel/Palestine. Joseph was ordained by the Rabbinical School of Hebrew College in Boston in 2010. After ordination, he served a congregation in Revere, Massachusetts, worked as a chaplain in elder care institutions, and co-founded Ruach Guild, a skill development and support group for activists who provide spiritual care to social justice leaders, movements, and organizations. Joseph lives with his partner Sarah is Silver Spring, Maryland.
Cathy Sultan lived in Beirut, Lebanon with her Lebanese husband and two children from 1969 to 1983. In March 2002, Cathy traveled to Jerusalem and the West Bank for the first time to interview Palestinian refugees, scholars, Israeli soldiers, teenagers, teachers, businessmen and peace activists. Those interviews compose the material for her first book: Israeli and Palestinian Voices: A Dialogue with Both Sides. A third and up-to-date version of this book was just published in March 2015. Cathy has also penned two books on Lebanon: A Beirut Heart: One Woman's War and Tragedy in South Lebanon: The Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006. Her newest work, The Syrian, a political thriller, was released in October 2014. Prior to joining IFPB, she sat on the Executive Board of the National Peace Foundation where she coordinated programs designed to educate members about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Cathy led IFPB delegations in 2008, 2009 and 2010 and traveled to Gaza in November 2012 with an IFPB delegation.
#usaidwbg is proud to announce a $12 Million Contribution to the World Food Programme for food assistance in the West Bank and Gaza. This contribution will provide 10,200 metric tons of food assistance to 95,000 food insecure people in Gaza and an additional 41,500 food insecure people in the West Bank. This money will also support the West Bank electronic voucher program benefiting 50,000 vulnerable Palestinians...
From the Press Release of Tuesday, January 26, 2016 1,700 Year Old Funerary Inscriptions of “Rabbis” were Exposed in the Ancient Cemetery at Zippori In cooperation with the Kinneret Academic College and the Israel Antiquities Authority
Three 1,700 year old funerary inscriptions written in Aramaic and Greek were recently revealed in Moshav Zippori in the north...The two Aramaic inscriptions mention individuals referred to as “rabbis” who were buried in the western cemetery of Zippori; their names have not yet been deciphered.
According to Dr. Motti Aviam of the Kinneret Institute for Galilean Archaeology, “The importance of the epitaphs lies in the fact that these reflect the everyday life of the Jews of Zippori and their cultural world. Researchers are uncertain as to the meaning of the term “rabbi” at the time when Rabbi Yehuda Ha-Nasi resided in Zippori together with the Tannaim and after him by the Amoraim – the large groups of sages that studied in the city’s houses of learning. One of the surprises in the newly discovered inscriptions is that one of the deceased was called “the Tiberian”. This is already the second instance of someone from Tiberias being buried in the cemetery at Zippori. It is quite possible that Jews from various parts of Galilee were brought to Zippori to be buried in the wake of the important activity carried out there by Rabbi Yehuda Ha-Nasi. Another possibility is that the man moved to Zippori and died there, but wanted to be remembered as someone who originally came from Tiberias. In the second Aramaic epitaph the word le-olam(forever) appears for the first time in inscriptions found at Zippori. The term le-olam is known from funerary inscriptions in Bet She‘arim and elsewhere and means that the deceased’s burial place will remain his forever and that no one will take it from him. Both inscriptions end with the Hebrew blessing shalom.
The Greek inscription mentions the name Jose, which was very common amongst Jews living in Israel and abroad.
So far, seventeen funerary inscriptions were documented in the Zippori study, most of them written in Aramaic, which was the everyday language of Jews in Israel at that time. Contrasting this are the funerary inscriptions found in Tiberias – the second capital of the Galilee – which were mainly written in Greek. Several of the ancient inhabitants from Zippori are mentioned in these inscriptions, which include the names of rabbis and often have the names of the professions they were engaged in. Aramaic was the everyday language used by the Jews in the period of the Mishnah and Talmud, but some of them also spoke and read Greek, and thus there are also funerary inscriptions in that language.
Zippori was the first capital of the Galilee from the time of the Hasmonean dynasty until the establishment of Tiberias in the first century CE. The city continued to be central and important later on and was where Rabbi Yehuda Ha-Nasi resided and compiled the Mishnah. The Jewish life in the city was rich and diverse as indicated by the numerous ritual baths (miqwe’ot) discovered in the excavation; while at the same time the influence of Roman culture was also quite evident as reflected in the design of the town with its paved streets, colonnaded main roads, theater and bathhouses. The wealth of inscriptions from the cemeteries attests to the strong Jewish presence and the city’s social elite in the Late Roman period.
as oppressed peoples have demonstrated throughout the ages, it is human nature to react to occupation
"The UN Secretary General's remarks give a tailwind to terrorism. There is no justification for terrorism. The Palestinian murderers do not want to build a state – they want to destroy a state and they say this openly. They want to murder Jews simply because they are Jews and they say this openly. They do not murder for peace and they do not murder for human rights.
The UN lost its neutrality and moral force a long time ago and the Secretary General's remarks do not improve the situation."
Recently, in a piece for our Web site called “How Stories Deceive,” the science writer Maria Konnikova explained that con men take advantage of a psychological fact: when we’re caught up in a narrative, we become less skeptical. If anything, we want to believe. Afterward, we look back with astonishment at how easily we became characters in a made-up drama.
FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES 1948
VOLUME V, PART 2, THE NEAR EAST, SOUTH ASIA, AND AFRICA [DOCUMENT 137]
501.BB Palestine/4–1048: Telegram
[Document 137]
The Acting Secretary of State to the Consulate General at Jerusalem
Washington, April 10, 1948—2 p. m.secret us urgent
258. For Wasson1 from Henderson. Unless you perceive some reason for not so doing it is suggested that you make arrangements at once to see Magnes and give him orally following confidential message from me:
“Gravest danger exists that unless success is achieved in UN efforts to bring about truce and an arrangement whereby interim governmental machinery will be provided for Palestine after May 15 chaotic conditions involving great loss of life and property will prevail in Palestine. At no time has there been a greater need for courageously conciliatory attitude such as yours on part of both Arabs and Jews. If such attitude is to prevail cooperation on part of moderate and conciliatory Arabs and Jews is essential. It is therefore hoped that you either alone or accompanied by such other Jewish leaders as you may consider appropriate will come to US at earliest possible moment.”2
Lovett
1 Consul at Jerusalem.
2 Henderson’s message was delivered to Magnes on April 12. Jerusalem advised that Magnes had “indicated great interest in proceeding to US but in view precarious health must consult his doctors who heretofore have prevented his travelling. He also seemed concerned re auspices under which he would travel. He felt that his hand would be strengthened if he could say he had been invited by Senator Austin or by Dept of State to assist in bringing about peace in Palestine. Failing this he mentioned possible creation ad hoc committee his friends and supporters in United States who would invite him.” (Telegram 425, April 13, from Jerusalem, 501.BB Palestine/4–1348)
Henderson sent a further message to Magnes on April 15 which read in part as follows:
“I made my suggestion because of my belief that your presence in the U.S. during the discussions of the Palestine matter might have a helpful moderating influence on both Jews and Arabs. We feel that if a truce and an interim government are to be arranged for with a minimum amount of bloodshed the advice and assistance of outstanding Jewish leaders would be helpful. In my opinion your ability to aid might be adversely affected if the erroneous impression should be created that there was any especial relationship between you and the U.S. Government. If you should come we would like to have you do so only because you personally feel that you may be helpful and not because of any suggestion which I have made. It is also essential that everyone understand that you have a free hand.” (Telegram 269, April 15, to Jerusalem, 501.BB Palestine/4–1348)
Jerusalem advised on April 17 that Magnes agreed with Henderson’s “view concerning relationship US Government” and that Magnes expected to arrive in New York on April 21. (Telegram 451, April 17, from Jerusalem, 501.BB Palestine/4–1748)
Dr. Magnes said that the first of the points he desired to make was that great pressure could be brought to bear on both Arabs and Jews if the United States would impose even partial financial sanctions. He pointed out that the Jewish community in Palestine is an artificial development and that, although the work of the Jews had resulted in many beautiful accomplishments such as farms, universities, and hospitals, which resulted from contributions from the United States, the money now contributed to the Jewish community was being used solely for war “which eats up everything.” Dr. Magnes said that the Hagaimah costs $4 million a month to run. He was certain that, if contributions from the United States were cut off, the Jewish war machine in Palestine would come to a halt for lack of financial fuel...As Dr. Magnes was leaving, he asked permission to direct a very blunt question: “Do you think there is any chance to impose a solution on Palestine?”. I replied that imposition of a regime implied the use of force. It was clear as daylight that other governments were eager to sidestep and leave Uncle Sam in the middle. I did not think it was wise for the United States alone to take the responsibility for military commitments in Palestine but I would be glad to give this matter further thought.
I pointed out the unfortunate consequences which might follow if further illegal immigration into Palestine were to take place at this time and was assured by Mr. Shertok that the Jewish Agency would take all steps in its power to prevent such illegal immigration
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs (Henderson)Washington, December 8, 1947.secret
| Participants: | Mr. Moshe Shertok—Jewish Agency |
| Mr. Eliahu Epstein—Jewish Agency | |
| Mr. Henderson—NEA |
FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES 1947VOLUME V, THE NEAR EAST AND AFRICA [DOCUMENT 874]
867N.01/11–2447
[Document 874]
Memorandum by the Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs (Henderson) to the Under Secretary of State (Lovett)
[Washington,] November 24, 1947.
top secret
...I feel it again to be my duty to point out that it seems to me and all the members of my Office acquainted with the Middle East that the policy which we are following in New York at the present time is contrary to the interests of the United States and will eventually involve us in international difficulties of so grave a character that the reaction throughout the world, as well as in this country, will be very strong.
We are committed to the idea that the security of the Middle East is vital to the United States. We also agree that unless the British continue to remain a force in the Middle East, the security of the Middle East will be gravely endangered. It is impossible for the British to remain a force in the Middle East unless they retain the friendship of the Arab world. By our Palestine policy, we are not only forfeiting the friendship of the Arab world, but we are incurring long-term Arab hostility towards us. What is important is that the Arabs are losing confidence in the integrity of the United States and the sincerity of our many pronouncements that our foreign policies are based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations...
I wonder if the President realizes that the plan which we are supporting for Palestine leaves no force other than local law enforcement organizations for preserving order in Palestine. It is quite clear that there will be wide-scale violence in that country, both from the Jewish and Arab sides with which the local authorities will not be able to cope. It is my understanding that Mr. Johnson, on Saturday, indicated before the Subcommittee that if the situation in Palestine should develop into a menace to peace, the matter would naturally come before the Security Council and that the United States, along with the other four Great Powers, would be prepared to share responsibility for removing this menace. Our plan envisages apparently the despatch of American, Soviet and perhaps other troops to Palestine in order to preserve law and order. It seems to me that we ought to think twice before we support any plan which would result in American troops going to Palestine. The fact that Soviet troops under our plan would be introduced into the heart of the Middle East is even more serious. I know that you have so many problems facing you that you cannot keep informed regarding the details of all of them, and I am sending you this memorandum in order to make sure that you realize the direction in which we are headed.
In a way, B.D.S. leaders have played into the Netanyahu government’s hands, by blurring the Green Line for their own reasons, and by mounting a campaign against all Israeli entrepreneurs and scholars. Perhaps they assume that putting pressure on Israeli businesses, including banks, will force Israeli élites to effect a change in government policy. But this would be a mockery of the élite’s condition. Netanyahu’s right—which relies disproportionately on cloistered orthodox and less educated constituencies—has beaten the center-left tribunes in ten elections out of twelve since 1977.
They over there and we over here.
“I wish to separate from as many Palestinians as possible, as quickly as possible” said Herzog, speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. “They over there and we over here; we’ll erect a big wall between us. That is the kind of co-existence that’s possible now.
"...the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish People and only to the Jewish People! In order to achieve this, we must accomplish separation between the peoples. We shall be here, and they shall be there, and peace be on Israel and on the Middle East."
Douglas Valder Duff (a former Black and Tan from Ireland)...fitted well into the pro forma set out for the colonial policeman, but as history has shown, they quickly made the role their own. Duff in particular acquired a reputation for ruggedness and brutality, which was almost unique even in the turbulent interwar period in the colonies. Hated by both sides, anecdotes abound of full blown fist-fights with protesters, whippings (he usually carried a bull whip and a .45 calibre pistol, even when an officer), shots fired over and at protesters; it’s little surprise that he was targeted for assassination by both Jewish and Palestinian groups
“Going Beserk”: Duff and the Black and Tans at the Wailing Wall
Duff carried an Irish blackthorn baton or club (called a shillelagh) which he occasionally used to whack Palestinians over the head, leaving them unconscious. He carried a Colt 045 pistol on his hip and a Turkish styled whip. He generally bullied his way about, enforcing immediately and spontaneously his ideas of justice or at least whatever measure it would take to maintain order and get a job done...When there was an earthquake that left two “important” female tourists buried in a collapsed hotel in Jericho, he used his whip to coerce local Bedouins to dig them out. When one of the Bedouins attempted to leave before they found the bodies, Duff “hit him with a beautiful left uppercut to his bearded face and sank a right-cross to his heart.” The Bedouin collapsed. Duff ordered him to be wrapped in woven-wire and whipped; the other Bedouin kept digging.17
Inspector Duff seems to have played a dubious role at the outset of the Western Wall Incident of 1928. The Wailing Wall, or Western Wall of the Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, is sacred to both Muslims and Jews. In the 1920s, tensions mounted between Palestinian Muslims and Zionists over ownership, control, and access to the Wall. The Western Wall incident of September 1928 sparked rivalry and violence that spread across Palestine. By the end of the following year, the violence left 133 Jews and 116 Arabs dead.18
In September of 1928, just prior to the Jewish holiday of Yon Kippur, the Jews erected a screen across the alley that ran along the Wall. Inspector Duff visited the Wall area with the District Commissioner of Jerusalem, Edward Keith-Roach and exchanged words with the leader of the Ashkenazi community, “beadle Noah Gladstone” [Rabbi Noah Baruch Glasstein], there that same evening. The Jewish leader promised to have the screen removed by the next morning, but this did not happen.19 The following day, Inspector Duff, sent a few of his local police down to remove the screen. When they returned tattered and beaten, he called for ten British officers, in battle gear, from nearby Mount Scopus. Once they arrived, Duff was pleased to find that four of the ten were his old comrades, also former “Black and Tans.” They hurried down to the Wall, pushing through the crowds, and removed the screen, as Jewish women hit them with their parasols. After tearing down the screen, a Jewish man clung to it as Duff and his men pushed through the angry crowd. Duff then threw the remains of the screen down into the Tyropean Valley, along with the man who was still clinging to it.20
In the days that followed the “Black and Tans” removal of the screen at the Wailing Wall, Douglas Duff became a public enemy of the Zionist Jews in Jerusalem. Zionists quickly criticized the “brutal” tactics of the British Palestine Police. One incident occurred, which Duff recorded later in his account of events, which sheds light on his bearings and psychological outlook. He and other police went to disperse a Jewish demonstration in the new part of Jerusalem. The angry crowd attacked their two trucks and forced Duff and the other police to retreat to a police outpost. Soon afterward, when the District Superintendent and a dozen troopers arrived, he ordered Duff not to show himself to the crowd. Defying these orders, Duff flung open the door and charged outside yelling, kicking and swirling his whip. As he describes it, “Once again I experienced that strange and utterly sublime ecstasy of ‘going berserk,’ as my barbarian forefathers had done. I had no consciousness of what I was doing as I sprang at that crowd.” The crowd dispersed as the other officers and troopers came out of the outpost. But, reminiscent of the Irish Rebellion, in the weeks that followed, three attempts of assassination were directed at Duff. 21
17 Duff, Bailing, 153-156 18 Studies on the Wailing Wall disturbances of 1928-1929 include: Philip Mattar, “The role of the Mufti of Jerusalem in the Political Struggle over the Western Wall, 1928-1929,” Middle Eastern Studies 19:1 (1983), 104-118; and Martin Kolinsky, “Premeditation in the Palestine Disturbances of August 1929?” Middle Eastern Studies 26:1 (1990), 18-34; and Lawrence Davidson, “Competing Responses to the 1929 Arab Uprising in Palestine: The Zionist Press versus the State Department,” Middle East Policy5:2 (1997), 93-112.19 Duff ’s account submitted to the District Superintendent of Police, W. F. Wainwright, CO 733-163-4, 0001, p. 126. A similar account was submitted by a certain American named Author Raus to the Zionist Executive of Palestine with copies provided to other Zionist organizations and to the British Mandate Government. In Raus’ account, the beadle had not agreed to take down the screen, but rather Keith-Roach was informing him that Duff would take the screen down the following morning. Arthur Raus to Colonel Kisch, 3 January 1929, CO 733-163-4, 0001, p. 143-145.20 Duff, Bailing, 169-177. See also Tom Segev’s narrative of the events in his One Palestine, Complete (New York: Henry Holt, 2000), 296297.21 Duff, Bailing, 176-178.
Shortly after my return to Palestine I became entangled in what has since been called "The Wailing Wall Incident". It was my bad luck that became the central figure in the biggest Arab-Jewish controversy of the early years. It happened on the Day of Atonement, the great Jewish festival of Yom Kippur, 1928.
I accidentally met the British District Commissioner near the Holy Sepulchre that evening and he invited me to accompany him down to the Temple area, where he proposed to visit some of the religious sheikhs. We walked slowly down David Street, which runs from the Jaffa Gate, downhill, across the filled-in Tyropean Valley, to the Gate of the Chain, leading into the Temple area. Immediately to the right of this Gate is the old Mekhamme Sharia, the Muslim religious court, where matters of dowries, wards, wills, religious and charitable endowments and all questions of divorce are tried by doctors learned in the Islamic canons. There we were met by several of the venerable sheikhs, clad in well-brushed, black cassock-like garments, their red fezzes bound with snowy turbans.
We walked into the Sharia court with them, where the District Commissioner, glancing out of the tall window, studied the Jewish throng at the Wailing Wall, a few yards beneath us. The enclosure was filled with worshippers, who kept coming and going as they always did in this great festival. The time was about four in the afternoon, which it is important to remember, as the great Jewish feast started at sunset that evening. I had noticed during one of my visits to the Wall earlier that day that an ordinary bedroom screen was standing about one-third of the way along the flag-stones. In my ignorance I failed to grasp its significance, and, as no one made any complaints about it, I did not suspect that bane of the Holy Places an Innovation! Real or fancied innovations, planned to establish a precedent and sternly resisted by the opponents of the innovators, caused most of our fights in the Sacred Shrines, and usually I was very quick to note any.
The District Commissioner saw it (the screen was made of light wooden battens with panels of thin cloth, constructed to fold in four) and remarked that he had never seen such an object at any previous Wailing Wall festival. Those very astute Muslim gentlemen instantly seized their opportunity; I am quite sure that they had paid no attention to the screen up to the moment when the District Commissioner unwittingly gave them their chance to raise a new issue.
They declared it was a barefaced Jewish attempt to seize the Mosque of El Akhsa and the Dome of the Rock; the thin end of the wedge to snatching of the holiest places in Islam because it had once been the site of the Jewish Temple. If the District Commissioner did not at once take action, they threatened, then he alone would be responsible for a Holy War that could rouse all the Muslim races to battle for the blessed shrine from whence the Prophet made his miraculous Ascension into Paradise. If he did not atone make the Jews realize that they could not play fast-and-loose with a Muslim holy place (for the Wailing Wall is the sanctuary where the heavenly steed, El Buraq, stood before taking God's Prophet on his midnight journey), then he was a false servant to his master the King of England, and he was also betraying the mighty British Empire.
Shadows of 1900 years before, when the Jewish priests howled at poor Pontius Pilate that he was no friend of Caesar if he let the Man of Nazareth continue to preach sedition!
The D.C. looked extremely worried at the storm he had inadvertently raised, and asked what the significance of the screen might be. The sheikhs came straight back at him, all talking at once, pointing out that, in a synagogue, the men and women worshippers are segregated from one another. Let the D.C. look at the base of the Wailing Wall. Were not the Jewish women all weeping and praying in the smaller section cut off by the screen? We’re not the men in the bigger one, assembled without a woman among them? Was it not more usual for the Jews to stand anywhere they chose while praying at the Wall and not to be divided by sex?
It was true enough. The men and women were divided by the screen. Then was this not absolute proof, the sheikhs shrieked, that the forgotten-of-God (their contemptuous name for the Jews) had instituted a synagogue on this sacred place where they were only allowed on sufferance by the graciousness of the Muslim?
Matters had been growing tenser during the previous weeks and Idealized that this seemingly trivial incident might easily be the detonator to ignite the magazine. The District Commissioner kept calm and made a joke saying that he would, personally, see that the screen was removed without delay: in fact that he would go down himself and speak to the Beadle of the Wall, Rabbi Noah.
He did so, and when the Beadle maintained there was no significance in the screen, saying that it had been put there merely to give the women little privacy in their lachrymose worship, the D.C. agreed that it could remain until the close of the service, but then must be taken quietly away. He explained, courteously, that the Muslim had objected to it and that he was sure the Beadle did not want to annoy them. Rabbi Noah promised to-do as he was ordered, whereupon the D.C. and I walked to the great Hurvah Synagogue in the Jewish quarter, a few score yards away, to pay courtesy visit on the Festival eve.
I became a little restive after about an hour of the ritual and whispered to the D.C. that I wanted to return to the "Wailing Wall to make sure that his orders about the screen were being obeyed. He agreed, although I thought that he did not seem to attach much importance to the matter. When I reached the Wall the screen was still in position, and Rabbi Noah told me, tearfully, that as it was already the sunset of a most sacred day no Jew would touch it, for that would be servile work within the meaning of the Doxology. He promised me, however, that he would obtain the services of a couple of Christian workmen during the evening, who could take it away without committing sin.
Telling him that I must obtain a ruling from the District Commissioner, I walked back to the Hurvah Synagogue, but found that the D.C. had returned to the Residency, a Greek Patriarchate building inside the city walls on the route between the Jaffa and New Gates. He offered me a whisky-and-soda when I reported to him, but as he had several other guests he paid little attention to me beyond telling me to make sure, without offending the Jews too much, that the screen was removed by morning.
I had had too much experience in dealing with all sorts of religious idealists at the Holy Places to act rashly. I scribbled in my note-book an order addressed to myself, embodying the D.C.'s instructions to remove the screen by morning, and stressing that I was to regard it as a matter of urgency. A short while afterwards I got near my host again and held out my note-book and a pencil, asking him to sign it. This sort of thing was not at all unusual; he had signed plenty of orders for me before and had often given me a search-warrant under similar circumstances. He glanced at what I had written and scrawled his name, probably amused at my insistence. I walked along to his chief clerk's office and got the old Greek Christian to press the official stamp on the order.
I visited the Wailing Wall twice during that night and on each occasion found the Beadle there. This was not in the least unusual on the Day of Atonement, and he assured me that some Christian workmen would soon be along to remove the screen. I told him I should visit him at seven in the morning and that if the screen was then still in position I should remove it without further palaver. At half-past six I was eating my breakfast when trooper ushered in the Beadle, who bowed humbly and gave me a note from the District Commissioner saying that, owing to the Beadle's being unable to obtain non- Jewish labor, he had given him permission to keep the screen until nine o'clock. Rabbi Noah insisted on retaining the written orders his authority to show to any policeman at the Wall.
I was still unsuspicious of any intrigue, and at ten to nine I told a reliable Arab inspector to take a few men to the Wailing Wall to make sure that the screen was down. It did not seem important enough a duty to require my presence at one of the busiest hours in my day, especially as I had no doubt of the Beadle's good intentions.
A quarter of an hour later the very angry Arab officer returned, with his tunic in shreds, his face scratched, and die beginnings of a couple of black eyes! His policemen were in equally bad shape, and boiling with wrath he told me that a crowd of Jews, mainly women and old ones at that had attacked his party the moment he entered the Wailing Wall area, where the screen was not only still erect but had been fixed with iron strappings to the flagstones! There was worse news: a large crowd of Arabs was mustering in the bazaars, swearing vengeance on the impious Forgotten-of-God who had seized the sanctuary of El Buraq and were desecrating it by making it intone of their synagogues!
The situation was explosive and as my two seniors were out of barracks took immediate action, knowing how quickly such a position could get beyond all control. I telephoned to Mount Scopus asking for ten British constables in battle-order, and then, grabbing my own steel helmet, walked down to the Jaffa Gate to wait for these reinforcements. Meanwhile, the reserve in barracks were paraded and issued with ball ammunition. I had already told the native orderly officer to telephone to Police Headquarters to let them know that I had gone to the scene of action and to ask them to take over control.
The British police arrived in record time, and I felt much happier when saw four of the old first-year ex-British gendarmes among them. They looked very cheerful as they leaped on to the pavement; I heard afterwards that they had all insisted on their right to come, saying that there would surely be some action if it was Duff who had sent for them. As we stormed down the narrow alley of David Street, and dived beneath the arches where the covered bazaars cross it near the entrance to the Jewish quarter, I saw that matters were grown extremely serious. Arabs were pouring down towards the Gate of the Chain, which is the main entrance to the Temple area, and every man of them bore a dagger in his belt or held a nabut club in his hand.
The whole city was buzzing like an angry beehive, and we had to cut through the throng like an armoured ship's bow; we could not afford to be gentle, for scores of human lives hung on the seconds we saved. A hundred yards short of the Gate of the Chain we turned sharply to the right, clattered downhill and winding round several corners reached the entrance to the Wailing Wall
The narrow area beneath the great stone blocks which have stood there since King Solomon completed his father's work in building the First Temple, was packed tight with Jewish worshippers, mainly elderly women, of the older, orthodox type. A great hush fell as we appeared amid the angry roars of the great unseen mob of Muslim mustering on the farther side of the great Wall. I distinctly heard the old fighting rally of Islam shouted bay stentorian voice.
"Kill the Jewish dogs! Islam is endangered. Strike!"
The hush lasted only a few seconds before it was shattered by the shrill clamour of the raging women. I grabbed the Beadle and demanded why the screen was still in position, but poor old Rabbi Noah was beyond speech. Hating violence in all its forms, he was horrified and terror-stricken beyond his strength, and sagged supinely in my hands. Over the heads of the women saw the screen, the symbol of the whole incident.
"Tear it down, Sergeant!" I roared, and led the way through the crowd. It was very hot and the smell of over-heated and under-washed femininity hung cloyingly sweet-sour in that narrow, sun-smitten space. Keeping closely together we forged our way forward, pushing aside the angry ladies as they hammered us with umbrellas and sticks, which clattered on our helmets; one beldame, who chose me as her particular target, belaboured my back until her parasol broke. Their fingers slashed and tore, they satin our faces and shrieked obscenities as they strove to block our passage.
I reached the flimsy screen first, but as I did so a Jewish worthy, clad in long caftan and a fur-trimmed wide-caved hat, caught hold of it and shouted in English that he meant to die where he stood and that we would have to take him along with the screen. None of our female attackers were struck by any of us and not a Jewish man was injured as we stormed our way out with the screaming rabbi clinging convulsively to the wreckage of the screen, which we carried in our midst. We reached the narrow lane leading to the Dung Gate at a point where there was a break in the houses opening on to the cactus-covered slope of the Tyropean Valley, opposite the spring of the great arch of the bridge, which once connected the Temple with the Upper City. There I halted my party, turned them about, ordered the sergeant to throw the shreds of the screen into the valley, and when the Rabbi refused to loosen his grip, he went down the twenty-foot-steep slope with it. The British police, veterans of many Jerusalem street fights, took up a strong defensive position in a deep archway, where we could be attacked only in front.
The crowd of furious women believed they were fighting sacrilegious infidels who had offered their religion a deadly insult in its most sacred shrine on the holiest day of the year, and would have torn us to pieces or trampled us to death, an unthinkably humiliating and disgraceful end for any man conscious of his masculinity, and already ashamed of the sordid part he was being forced to play in fighting females.
Fortunately for us the situation changed as soon as the shrieking women realized that we were holding an impregnable position. They screamed with hysterical fear and fright, and a wild stampede started as the whole crowd of .worshippers ran shrieking uphill towards David Street. We wheeled out of our archway and mingled with them, keeping our ranks very tight as we were carried along, for I was afraid of what might happen when that crowd of insanely-shrieking Jewish women met the mob of angry Arabs thronging the main street above. At the intersection of the lane with David Street we resumed our line, facing downhill towards the Gate of the Chain, while three of the British police moved quickly up to the junction of the covered bazaars, to stop the hordes of rage-filled Arabs flooding in from the Muslim quarter, and also to block the main entrance to the Jewish quarter.
I still maintain that that day we prevented a general massacre of Jewson those cobbled, sun-drenched narrow streets. Not a single Jew was seriously injured; even the Rabbi, who had clung to the screen, sustained only a few abrasions and bruises. A few of the Arabs who tried to attack the terror-stricken torrent of Jews had their sconces cracked by our rifle-butts, but that was all.
No one who has not served in the Holy City can realize how quickly ghastly rumors can spread; within fifteen minutes the furthest alleyways of Meah Shearim and Mustashfa outside the walls were filled with white-faced folk watching the shopkeepers as they frenziedly clamped their shutters, while tales of a massacre in the Old City grew more horrifying with each repetition.
The first person in authority to arrive on the scene was the Inspector-General, at the head of a strong posse of armed police. He looked very-angry until I gave him my report, whereupon he left at once for Headquarters so that he might have fuller control of the situation.
After him came a senior officer of the Legal department, who accused me of having used the most brutal methods against the Jewish worshippers. He would not allow me to say a word, and consequently I became extremely angry. When he asked me how many had been killed by the police I turned on him savagely and bade him to look round for any wounded or dead he could find, and when he failed to find any to come back to me and apologize. He was very angry at being addressed in such a way by so junior a personas myself, but I was past caring what might happen to my career; I have always detested the men of the long gown, especially when they presume to interfere in scenes of action.
After a couple of hours the blaze died down, and I was ordered to report to barracks, where I found my own senior officer and the Inspector-General. They asked me why I had caused such a flurry over so simple matter as removing a screen. I explained what had happened and the significance of the screen, but they still seemed to think that I had acted rashly in forcibly removing it, and told me that I should have asked for higher authority before taking such drastic action.
I again explained the swiftly-mounting Arab fanaticism but I was told that I should not have acted on my own responsibility in so dangerous situation. I gaped at that, and said that I had not taken any initiative but had merely obeyed the orders of the District Commissioner, and produced my note-book with my very definite orders to remove the screen at all costs, with the D.C.'s signature beneath it. That ended my personal responsibility, but I knew only too well how close I had become to being made the official scapegoat. As it was I made very powerful enemies, for the "Wailing Wall Incident" burgeoned into far greater importance than any of us imagined possible on the day when it occurred.
589. Palestine and Transjordan: Examination of the Annual Report for 1925.
Arab Grievances.
M. PALACIOS, returning to the concrete questions of a general character of which the Arabs complained, recalled those concerning the national title, the national hymn and the flag. These were really thorny questions, like all sentimental and patriotic questions, regarding which it was necessary to observe complete prudence and tact.
As regards the first point, the Arabs claimed that it was not in conformity with Article 22 of the Mandate to print the initials and even the words "Eretz Israel" after the name "Palestine" while refusing the Arabs the title "Surial Janonbiah" ("Southern Syria"). The British Government had not accepted the use of this Arab title, but gave the place of honour to the Hebrew word used for 2,000 years and decided that the official name in Hebrew was "Palestina" followed by the initials signifying "Aleph Jod", the regular Hebrew name. Was the question still under discussion and could the accredited representative give the Commission any further information?
Colonel SYMES explained that the country was described as "Palestine" by Europeans and as "Falestin" by the Arabs. The Hebrew name for the country was the designation "Land of Israel", and the Government, to meet Jewish wishes, had agreed that the word "Palestine" in Hebrew characters should be followed in all official documents by the initials which stood for that designation. As a set-off to this, certain of the Arab politicians suggested that the country should be called "Southern Syria" in order to emphasise its close relation with another Arab State.
Not that there was, in 1922, any sense of political nationality among the Palestinians. In those days the artificial States set up by their French and British masters meant less than nothing to them. Most Muslim of the illiterate masses were not conscious of being members of any nation, and if one was asked his nationality he always looked a trifle puzzled and replied, "Thanks be to God, I am Muslim." Such nationalities as Iraqi, Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians or Palestinians meant absolutely nothing to them. Were they not all good Muslim? Was not that enough?
I had pointed out to the young Jews that we must avoid killing any of the
Arabs if we could, so as to obviate the starting of a blood feud which might
last for generations. They co-operated so magnificently that we routed the
rebels without sending a single one of them to enjoy the favours of the
Eternal Maidens of Paradise.
The first paragraph of the Easter declaration was a political winner – until you started thinking about it. "In the name of God and of the dead generations from which she receives her old tradition of nationhood," it said. "Ireland, through us, summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom." The problem lay in the expression "through us" – not because the Irish signatories doubted it, but because no one had elected them to stage this romantic, bloody and ultimately hopeless military operation against the British on behalf of the "sovereign independent state" which they had declared...The "killer" came in the second paragraph of the declaration
in which Thomas Clarke, Sean Mac Diarmada, PH [Padraig Henry] Pearse, James Connolly, Thomas MacDonagh, Eamonn Ceannt and Joseph Plunkett claimed that they were supported by Ireland's exiled children in America "and by gallant allies in Europe". This was a killer paragraph in every sense of the word. For the "gallant allies" were the Kaiser's armies, which were at that very moment slaughtering British soldiers in the titanic war in France and Flanders. While the British, along with 80,000 Irishmen in British uniform, fought the Germans who had invaded "little Catholic Belgium" in 1914, Pearse and his friends – and not all of his comrades were his friends – were fighting for little Catholic Ireland on the side of Britain's enemy.
If its creators had not declared for Germany, the British might have been able to brush the Rising aside as a violent but hot-headed local rebellion. But for a British government facing the German onslaught in 1916, this was an act of gross treachery, one that would inevitably provide Pearse with the blood sacrifice of which he spoke so admiringly.
“We’re settlers son, we settle for things,”
The campaign plays on the word, presenting a frontier-era family in a suburban neighborhood who stick to antiquated ways such as a horse-and-buggy and, oh yeah, cable.
The ad is funny...But the real emotion of this spot goes much deeper than cheap laughs. The real emotion here is assumptive embarrassment, a weapon DirecTV has been using for years. This particular ad suggests that anyone using cable is that Dad on a tractor in his front yard, a settler. Of course the creative idea is way over the top, but that makes the point sticky and tougher to take as a cable patron. And I’d wager some pretty hefty percentage of the cable viewers paused for a second and wondered, “Am I settling with cable?”
MR KIRBY: Yeah. Samir. I’m sorry, Samir.
QUESTION: What is the U.S. reaction to reports that the Israel minister of defense on Wednesday approved the creation of a 10-acre settlement in the West Bank?
MR KIRBY: We are deeply concerned about the minister of defense’s decision to expand the existing settlement boundary of the Gush Etzion Regional Council to include a former church compound, which effectively creates a new settlement on 10 acres in the West Bank. It’s important to note that some 70 percent of the West Bank’s Area C has already been unilaterally designated as Israeli state land, or within the boundaries of these regional settlement councils.The new decision only expands this significant majority of the West Bank that has already been claimed for exclusive Israeli use. Along with the regular retroactive legalization of unauthorized outposts and construction of infrastructure in remote settlements, actions such as this decision clearly undermine the possibility of a two-state solution.And Samir, as you know, our longstanding position on settlement activity is clear and has not changed. We view it as illegitimate and counterproductive to the cause of peace. Continued settlement activity and expansion raises honest questions about Israel’s long-term intentions and will only make achieving a two-state solution that much more difficult. As we’ve previously made clear, we continue to look at both sides to demonstrate with actions and policies a genuine commitment to a two-state solution, and actions such as yesterday’s decision, we believe, does just the opposite.
...QUESTION: But can I just follow up very quickly on this issue? What about the – those who are purchasing these lands? There are – there seems to be American groups and American citizens that are buying this land or establish some sort of schemes through which they can buy land and so on. There is a lot of wealthy Americans who are buying some of this land and financing the settlements. Do you have a position on that? I mean, do you have – do you call on, let’s say, United States citizens who live in the United States that the purchase of land for the purpose of settlement expansion is a hindrance to peace or to the efforts or to would-be talks?
MR KIRBY: I would just say – I would just say two things, Said – that these donors are private citizens --... but this Administration, like every one before it since 1967, views settlement activity as illegitimate and counterproductive to the cause of peace. And the U.S. Government does not support any activity that would indicate otherwise, okay?
QUESTION: Okay. If I also may follow on a couple issues on the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation, I know I asked you on Wednesday about the excessive use of force, possible excessive use of force. I mean, just today, the Israelis shot with live ammunition 14 Palestinians throughout the West Bank, they attacked demonstrators, including Western demonstrators, including Americans, who were in support of the Palestinians with tear gas, many of them were injured, and so on. But you will not say that Israel is using an excessive use of force in quelling these demonstrations and these confrontations, despite the fact that you are aware that there are things that are very close – if you don’t want to call them that way, but they look like so many executions and so on. So when will you at call – at what level will you say that this is really an excessive use of force that we will not accept?MR KIRBY: I have been nothing but consistent, Said, that I’m not going to characterize every single act or every single word that’s uttered. We’ve made clear to all sides what we want to see, which is tensions to go down, violence to stop, and innocent people allowed to continue their lives. Now, look, in general, without speaking to any one act, of course we never want to see security forces in any country overreact to activities. But I’m not going to get into a situation where every act there we are making judgments about or characterizing. We’ve made it very clear to leaders on all sides what we want to see happen here. People need to be able to go about their lives on all sides of this and to live peacefully, and that’s what we want to see. And the violence that continues is doing nothing to get us there. It’s certainly not doing anything to get us to a point where you can legitimately begin to talk about pursuing a two-state solution.QUESTION: John.QUESTION: Including easing up on the checkpoints? I mean --MR KIRBY: Again, I’m not going to --QUESTION: -- I’m sorry to bring in a personal issue, but I was talking to my newspaper editors, and they were held up for like three, four hours today at the checkpoints. They couldn’t get to the paper because of just at whim they hold them up for hours on end. I mean, what needs to be done? In your view, what needs to be done to ease the situation? You constantly speak of things that the Israelis can do to ease up the situation and make life somewhat more tolerable for the Palestinians.MR KIRBY: We’ve said that leaders on all sides have a lot to do here, which is to take proactive steps to restore calm and to cease the violence, to allow innocent people to continue to live their lives, and to try to get us to a point where we can begin to work towards a two-state solution. That’s a requirement for leaders on all sides of this, Said, and we’ve been very consistent and very clear about that.
Posts
