<html>
<body>
<font size=5><b>"Blood on their Hands"<br>
</font><font size=4>The Demonization of the Palestinians<br><br>
</b></font><font size=3>April 09, 2009 By Shmuel Amir <br>
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/21122" eudora="autourl">
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/21122<br><br>
<br><br>
</a><i>"Blood on their Hands" </i> is probably one of the most
successful slogans ever invented by Israel's propaganda machine. It
has a most powerful and immediate impact, both visual and
emotional: it suggests a brutal murderer who should be confined to
a prison for the rest of his natural days.<br>
<br>
It further eliminates the need for any more profound enquiry. No
one need ask <i>why</i> he committed such a barbaric deed or if his
victim had done him any wrong. And it also eliminates any
possibility of negotiations with him or with those in whose name he was
acting (in our case the Hamas and other Palestinian groups). It is
obvious that they came to kill us simply because we are Jews and because
murdering people is in their genes. They are completely devoid of
any human or humane values.<br>
<br>
We have been told by Ehud Barak, a man whose hands have never been soiled
by blood, that <i>the</i> Arabs are unable to distinguish between right
and wrong because they do not come from the Judeo-Christian
tradition. We were told by another prime minister, Menachem Begin,
that the Palestinians are two-legged animals.<br>
<br>
As a result, in all media discussions regarding the issue of prisoner
exchange (the name given to negotiations over the return of the kidnapped
soldier Gil'ad Shalit even though the Israelis do not recognize their
captives as POWs), the words "blood on their hands" are
repeated in almost every sentence. And in such an emotionally charged
atmosphere there is little room for logic. (Nonetheless, it should
be pointed out that the majority of Israelis still favor releasing those
450 prisoners in order to bring Shalit home.)<br>
<br>
The blanket condemnation of people fighting for their independence as
criminals has always been part of colonial strategy. Turning POWs
into criminals with blood on their hands tells us more about the colonial
character of Israel than it does about the captive prisoners.<br>
<br>
Colonial peoples fighting for their independence have always been accused
of being cruel and murderous and thus labeled
"terrorists." Their colonial rulers could not possibly
acknowledge them as soldiers because if those people were soldiers
fighting for their freedom, then what were they themselves? If they
are labeled terrorists (and terrorists are surely not entitled to any
rights) then "civilized European" soldiers have full permission
to hunt them down like animals.<br>
<br>
<i>The blood-thirsty Mau Mau<br>
<br>
</i>A rather telling example of this practice, remembered perhaps by the
older generation, is Kenya's war of liberation. In 1952 a rebellion
broke out in Kenya, known as the Mau Mau Rebellion. This was an
uprising of the Kikuyu people against the 50-year long appropriation of
their lands by white settlers. The farmers deprived of their lands
became either serfs on their own land (the lucky ones) or were
incarcerated in "reservations," or detention camps.<br>
<br>
The Kikuyu rebellion was rife with barbarism, including brutality against
Kenyans who refused to join in the struggle. I remember the way the
press (international and local Israeli) described the brutality of the
Kikuyu in vivid detail. The mere mention of the name Mau Mau was
enough to send chills up and down your spine. No one ever mentioned
the reasons behind the uprising. No one ever mentioned the brutal
subjugation of the natives by their British masters. Even today one
can hardly believe the facts.<br>
<br>
The prisoners were tortured and starved and some of the tortures were
grotesque. They were attacked by dogs and forced to commit
atrocities on themselves and their fellows. The British Secretary
for the Colonies at the time, Alan Lennox-Boyd, described the torturers
as a few "bad apples" (in Israel the term is "exceptional
cases") and the uprising as an "atavistic evil." In one of
the many books on the subject, the trials held against persons suspected
of belonging to the Mau Mau are described as "a picture of
systematic injustice." Defendants had poor representation,
convictions were made on scanty evidence by dubious informers, and the
judges were usually highly prejudiced (and also bribed). The result
was 1090 hangings.<br>
<br>
In terms of military power, the rebels were poorly armed against the
might of the British Empire. The Mau Mau described themselves as
their own tanks. <br>
<br>
In terms of victims, the figures are fairly representative of such
colonial confrontations. The Mau Mau (the "brutal
monsters") killed 32 white settlers and about 200 British soldiers
and police during the period of the rebellion. The British hanged
1090 suspects and killed 15,000 others. They detained another
150,000 Kikuyus of whom some 100,000 (according to various sources)
perished.<br>
<br>
Fortunately or unfortunately, these figures don't tell the whole story
because before they left Kenya, the British destroyed hundreds of
thousands of documents. But after putting down the uprising, the
British were finally forced to leave Kenya. The famous "terrorist,
" Jomo Kenyatta, who had been imprisoned, was released and became
Kenya's first president. <br>
<br>
The end of this particular story is not limited to Kenya. Dr. Kwame
Nkrumah of Ghana had also been imprisoned by the British and eventually
became the country's first president, as did Nelson Mandela of South
Africa. Imprisoned for long years as a "terrorist,"
Mandela had the dubious honor of being officially "acquitted"
by the American Congress of terrorism and named instead a
"freedom fighter." We in Israel have now only to await
the release of Marwan Barghouti, the most popular Palestinian leader
today and probably the best choice for future president of a free
Palestine, from his prison cell in Israel, where he has been sentenced to
three life imprisonments.<br>
<br>
No colonial regime can exist without disguising and/or justifying its
actions. The British did it successfully over a long period of
time. They demonized the freedom fighters in their colonies as
monsters while glorifying themselves as rulers of high moral standards,
interested only in bringing enlightenment and progress to the wayward
"natives." We, too, have been told time and again that
the army of our "enlightened occupation" is "the most
moral army in the world" <br>
<br>
<i>The Blood-thirsty Slaves of Virginia<br>
</i> <br>
In August 1831, while slavery was still the norm in the United
States, the slave Nat Turner led a rebellion of slaves in the state of
Virginia, with seventy of his followers. It began with the
slaughter of whites in the city of Southhampton and victims were not only
men, but women and children.<br>
<br>
The rebellion failed. Thousands of soldiers put down the small
rebel army and Turner was captured and hanged. Following this, the
army conducted a massacre, killing any slave who was even suspected
of supporting the rebellion.<br>
<br>
That same year the first issue of an abolitionist journal, <i>The
Liberator,</i> was published by William Lloyd Garrison. He
wrote:<br>
<br>
<i>On this subject I do not wish to think, or speak, or write, with
moderation. No,no! Tell a man whose house is on fire, to give
a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands
of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the
fire into which it has fallen; but urge me not to use moderation in a
cause like the present. I am in earnest - I will not equivocate - I
will not excuse - I will not retreat a single inch - AND I WILL BE
HEARD.<br>
<br>
</i>
******<br>
<br>
The main perpetrator of "blood on their hands" has always been
the colonialist himself. There are many differences among the
various colonialist-anti-colonialist struggles but they all share one
characteristic: the demonization of the victim, of the people trying to
break the chains restraining them. They are always depicted as
murderers, their hands soaked in blood. They are always described
as savage monsters, animals, or creatures that God is sorry he created
(former Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef). Furthermore, as is well-known, they
are completely irrational.<br>
<br>
Colonialists, on the other hand, according to their own evaluation, are
rationalist and considerate, working for the benefit of the native
population. Their aims are noble and their empires have brought only
progress and civilization to the backward peoples of the world.<br>
<br>
During our recent incursion into the Gaza Strip, it was apparent to
all that there was not a single drop of blood on our hands. The
blood of 1330 Palestinian men, women and children, could be discerned,
however, on the wings of our bombers, on the turrets of our tanks and on
the barrels of our cannons.<br>
<br>
Translated by Chaya Amir<br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>