Long before Prisoner X: A British Censor’s Order in Mandate Palestine
(From Palestine Post, 29th August, 1938, 1)
If you take a selection of newspapers from the Mandate Palestine press published after the tail-end of August in 1938, you will notice something that they all have in common.
Aside from the things that we all already know that newspapers have in common – headlines, columns, ads, news (etc), is this: All reports related to British military or police maneuvers, or the activities of Arab rebels (this was two years into the 1936-39 Arab revolt) state that they are based on “official reports” or taken from an official “bulletin from the Public Information Officer.” See for example paragraph three in this article from the Palestine Post on 9th November, 1938:
So what was this bulletin? And did it exist from the beginning of the British Mandate in 1920?
The short answer to the second question is no. British diplomatic correspondence from 1938 reveals that on 26th August, 1938, the Mandate Authority issued a Censor’s Order requiring the local press to base itself on an official bulletin when reporting the issues mentioned above.**
In answer to the first question (what was this bulletin?), here is an extract from the High Commissioner for Palestine Harold MacMichael’s secret dispatch to London, dated 13th September. In it, he explains the Censor’s Order, and what was behind it:
“The reaction and tone of the Arab, Jewish and English (Palestine Post) press on public security in this country has been a matter of preoccupation to myself and the General Officer Commanding, particularly during the last three months.
The Arab press yielding partly to the pressure of terrorist threats and actuated partly by their own sympathies, persisted in giving gratuitous and exaggerated publicity to any success achieved by the bandits. Such publicity not only encouraged lawlessness and violence, but also tended seriously to undermine Arab morale in the Government service and thus render even more difficult the re-establishment of security in the country.
The influence of the Hebrew press, including the ‘Palestine Post’, was no less dangerous. Editors allowed their journalistic zeal to leave no incident unpublished regardless of the fact whether or not such publication was, from a Jewish standpoint, politically advisable or even warranted. Indeed it is said that the bandits, in their desire to obtain the fullest publicity for their exploits, ensured that all reporters of those exploits were, by pre-arranged scheme, conveyed hot-haste to the cafes of Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem where they were at once collected by enthusiastic Jewish reporters with the result that – paradoxical though it sounds – the Jewish press became the unwitting publicists of the enemy.
For a time the Public Information Officer appealed to editors, and official warnings and suspensions ordered under the Press Ordinance,* on the one hand to induce a more circumspect attitude in the Arab press, and on the other to convince Hebrew editors of the folly of their ways; but eventually it was apparent that neither was prepared or sensible enough to curb their activities, and accordingly on the 26th August, after consultation with the General Officer Commanding, I caused a Censor’s Order to be issued under Defence Regulation 11(3) prohibiting to all the local press any comment on local military or police operations or on the activities of the rebels, and secondly, any reference to such operations and activities other than in the terms of such official communications as would be made to them by the Press Bureau. I enclose for your information a copy of the notice in question.
Simultaneously I instructed the Public Information Officer to organise an augmented news service from military and police sources which should be made officially available to the Press and Broadcasting service. This had been done; and although on the pretext that their journalistic independence and privilege had been threatened, the Hebrew editors in particular have expressed their strong disapproval of the system, the newspapers as they are now published are no longer the same menace to public security. This censor’s order will be maintained until further notice.“
(Another example: “Disturbances from recent days – official notices from Tuesday afternoon,” from Davar, 2nd November, 1938, 1)
A look at Palestine Post and Davar from the date of the order shows that reports based on this official bulletin continued appearing through 1938, and into 1939. It is not clear, however, whether this was still under the Censor’s Order above, and I have not (yet!) been able to find the date that the order was lifted.
(Another example from Al-Difa’, 11th November, 1938, 4: “Gunshots on Jewish officer; announcement of curfew in Jaffa in the daytime for a period of seven hours; demolition of two houses in the city of Nablus after throwing of bombs on an army base; strike in Tulqarem; from the official report which the Public Security Department publishes.”)
Coming up in a separate post: Was the Censor’s Order immediately upheld by the local press? What did the British High Commissioner report to London in his next secret dispatch?
(and just in case you wanted some more information…)
*The British Mandate Press Ordinance was issued in 1933. British norms regulating licensing, closure of publications, and approval of journalist credentials are still maintained in Israel today.
**Of course, there there was censorship of the press before the 26th August order. Without going into too much detail, the British issued Censor’s Orders to deal with specific issues, as well as asking to see material before publication in the local press. Newspapers that did not comply with orders of the censor faced suspension for varying periods of time (for examples, see this British report to the League of Nations in 1937). In addition, exclusion orders were placed on publications from outside Mandate Palestine; telegrams of foreign correspondents were sometimes censored; and there were limits put on who could make international trunk phone calls, in order to control what news was leaving the country.
(Images from Palestine Post and Davar taken from Historical Jewish Press archive. Image of Al-Difa’ photographed by me at National Library of Israel. Image of the British dispatch taken by me at Moshe Dayan Center library.)
A Mandate Palestine Censor’s Order (part two)
In my last post, I wrote about a British Censor’s Order, issued on 26th August, 1938 that required the Mandate Palestine press to base itself on an official bulletin when reporting on certain issues. These were British military or police maneuvers, and the activities of Arab rebels (this was two years into the 1936-39 Arab Revolt). I promised an update on whether the order was immediately upheld by the local press.
Here is an excerpt from the High Commissioner for Palestine’s secret dispatch to London, dated 24th October, 1938. It details how the Jewish and Arabic press responded:
“The Jewish papers have on the whole observed this instruction, both in the spirit and the letter. It has been a difficult restriction for them to obey because it renders largely superfluous the accounts of their reporters and correspondents. In that respect it is in some ways a severer measure than one prescribing a pre-publication censorship of all press matter. It has been arranged, however, that reporters may embellish the Public Information Office’s accounts of incidents, which are of necessity laconic, dry, rigorously objective, by giving some further innocuous details as, for example, the name, occupation and origin of wounded and murdered persons. In this way, the semblance of newspaper accounts has been preserved.
The Arabic press has found difficulty in observing the order because, like the rest of the Arab population, the editors are subjected to inexorable rebel pressure, and the gangs dislike publicity being given to their reverses and casualty lists. On the issue of the order, the editor of Falastin attempted to circumvent it and yet to keep his presses working by suspending the publication of Falastin [sic] and issuing instead a paper called Sirat el Mustaqim, which is an evening news sheet of insignificant reputation. Sirat el Mustaqim made no attempt to comply with Government’s order. It was accordingly suspended for three months.
This device having failed, Falastin [sic] and Ad Difa’ [sic] found themselves once more in a dilemma. On the one hand they feared that rebel threats would be implemented if they published only the official news, and on the other hand, suspension, with its attendant economic loss, if they overstepped the bound. It was an impossible choice for them and they finally solved the problem by a voluntary suspension of all the Arabic papers for a fortnight between September 3rd and October 7th, when they reappeared in order to publish accounts of the proceedings of the Arab parliamentary congress in Cairo.”
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged Arabs, History, Israel,
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged Arabs, censorship, Hebr
A Mandate Palestine Censor’s Order (part two)
ReplyDeletePosted on March 21, 2013 by af
image
In my last post, I wrote about a British Censor’s Order, issued on 26th August, 1938 that required the Mandate Palestine press to base itself on an official bulletin when reporting on certain issues. These were British military or police maneuvers, and the activities of Arab rebels (this was two years into the 1936-39 Arab Revolt). I promised an update on whether the order was immediately upheld by the local press.
Here is an excerpt from the High Commissioner for Palestine’s secret dispatch to London, dated 24th October, 1938. It details how the Jewish and Arabic press responded:
“The Jewish papers have on the whole observed this instruction, both in the spirit and the letter. It has been a difficult restriction for them to obey because it renders largely superfluous the accounts of their reporters and correspondents. In that respect it is in some ways a severer measure than one prescribing a pre-publication censorship of all press matter. It has been arranged, however, that reporters may embellish the Public Information Office’s accounts of incidents, which are of necessity laconic, dry, rigorously objective, by giving some further innocuous details as, for example, the name, occupation and origin of wounded and murdered persons. In this way, the semblance of newspaper accounts has been preserved.
The Arabic press has found difficulty in observing the order because, like the rest of the Arab population, the editors are subjected to inexorable rebel pressure, and the gangs dislike publicity being given to their reverses and casualty lists. On the issue of the order, the editor of Falastin attempted to circumvent it and yet to keep his presses working by suspending the publication of Falastin [sic] and issuing instead a paper called Sirat el Mustaqim, which is an evening news sheet of insignificant reputation. Sirat el Mustaqim made no attempt to comply with Government’s order. It was accordingly suspended for three months.
This device having failed, Falastin [sic] and Ad Difa’ [sic] found themselves once more in a dilemma. On the one hand they feared that rebel threats would be implemented if they published only the official news, and on the other hand, suspension, with its attendant economic loss, if they overstepped the bound. It was an impossible choice for them and they finally solved the problem by a voluntary suspension of all the Arabic papers for a fortnight between September 3rd and October 7th, when they reappeared in order to publish accounts of the proceedings of the Arab parliamentary congress in Cairo.”
Share this:
TwitterFacebook
Related
Israel's policy of demolishing homes and its roots in the British Mandate
In "Newspapers"
Last night, next to the radios
In "Arabs"
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's death in the Mandate Palestine press
In "Middle East"
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged Arabs, History, Israel, Jews, Mandate Palestine, newspapers, Palestine. Bookmark the permalink.
← Long before Prisoner X: A British Censor’s Order in Mandate PalestineWhen Tel Aviv lost its oldest resident
BRITAIN IN PALESTINE - EXHIBITION IN LONDON : BRUNEI GALLERY UNTIL 15 DEC. 2012
ReplyDeleteFRIDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2012 AT 11:12PM
Palestine Policemen of a mounted patrol visit a local sheik, Ramleh area, 1946-47
Britain In Palestine
Date: 11 October 2012 Time: 10:00 AM
Finishes: 15 December 2012 Time: 5:00 PM
http://www.soas.ac.uk/gallery/palestine/
Venue: Brunei Gallery Exhibition Rooms
SOAS, University of London
Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square, London WC1H 0XG
Tel: +44 (0)20 7637 2388
Type of Event: Exhibition
This exhibition will tell the story of what happened to Palestine and its people under the British mandate for Palestine. It will show how and why Britain got involved in Palestine, and the impact of British rule upon the country. Vivid and moving personal stories will portray the dilemmas of ordinary people caught up in the extraordinary circumstances of mandate-era Palestine featuring dramatic photographs, personal testimonies, important original documents, and poignant personal belongings that have survived from the time.
The exhibition will illustrate the experiences of British people who served in Palestine as colonial servants, Palestine Police and military servicemen. The reminiscences of these people and their families testify to the profound impression Palestine made on their lives.
Palestine became British territory after the First World War under a mandate from the League of Nations; from 1920 Palestine was ruled by a British High Commissioner reporting to the Government’s Colonial Office. Britain’s authority to rule was derived from a League of Nations mandate, written by the British and which included the controversial Balfour Declaration of 1917 which proffered British support for a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The ambiguities and the contradictions contained within the Mandate were to foster antagonism and resentment between Arabs and Jews in Palestine, which finally erupted into a full blown conflict when the British left in May 1948. The results of this conflict are still with us today.
View Photo
Arab Liberation Army, Palestine, 1948
Date: 16 November 1947 > Scheduled Withdrawal of British Military Forces From Palestine Begins
ReplyDeleteScheduled Withdrawal of British Military Forces From Palestine Begins
British military forces begin their scheduled withdrawal from Palestine. There are approximately 100,000 soldiers, 4,000 military police, and 1,000 civilians who will have to be moved to other military outposts or back to Britain. There are also large quantities of military stores which have to be transported.
The timetable for a complete evacuation from Palestine has not been released, but Britain will tell the UN that no British troops will be available for helping administer a transition to Jewish and Arab states.
The practice originated under the British Mandate for Palestine, when the British government gave authority to military commanders to confiscate and raze “any house, structure or land... the inhabitants of which he is satisfied have committed… any offence against these Regulations involving violence.” During the 1936-1946 Arab revolt in Palestine, the British military frequently demolished homes in villages implicated in rebel activity, with entire villages sometimes being destroyed. Some 2,000 Arab homes were demolished during the Arab revolt. In 1945 the authorities passed the Defense (Emergency) Regulations and Regulation 119 made this practice available to the local Military Commander without limit or appeal. During the Jewish insurgency against the British in the 1940s, the British only employed this tactic one time against the Jews. In August 1947, after failing to quell the Jewish insurgency, the British military received clearance from the High Commissioner to demolish Jewish homes. Subsequently, a Jewish home in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Shaul where arms were discovered during a routine search was destroyed.
ReplyDeleteAll the territory west of the Jordan River is Jewish territory and Israel can utilize any action it sees fit. International conventions do not apply.
British House Demolitions as Punishment
ReplyDeleteRegulation 119 in Palestine
119 – (1) A Military Commander may by order direct the forfeiture to the Government of Palestine of any house, structure, or land from which he has reason to suspect that any firearm has been illegally discharged, or any bomb, grenade or explosive or incendiary article illegally thrown, or of any house, structure or land situated in any area, town, village, quarter or street the inhabitants or some of the inhabitants of which he is satisfied have committed, or attempted to commit, or abetted the commission of, or been accessories after the fact to the commission of, any offence against these Regulations involving violence or intimidation or any Military Court offence; and when any house, structure or land is forfeited as aforesaid, the Military Commander may destroy the house or the structure or anything growing on the land.
(2) Members of His Majesty’s forces or the Police Force, acting under the authority of the Military Commander may seize and occupy, without compensation, any property in any such area, town, village, quarter or street as is referred to in sub-regulation (1), after eviction without compensation of the previous occupiers if any.
The U.N. did not create Israel - it only implemented international law & treaty
ReplyDeleteIn sum, modern Israel may credit its legal recreation to the Supreme Allied Powers and its 1920 San Remo conference which incorporated the 1917 Balfour Declaration as international law; thereby reconstituting the Jewish National Home in Palestine in 1920 with the British as trustee and its implementation by The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, and its de facto existence to the impatient belligerence of its enemies and the consequent resolve of the Jewish people to survive.
After the British abandoned its obligation to implement the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. The U.N. recognized that the Jews in Palestine-Israel have become a majority; as stated in the terms of international treaty and therefore the Jewish people can assume control of its own sovereignty. That took place on May 15, 1948.
AFSI - American Friends For Safe Israel
Yj Draiman
How the British Fought Arab Terror in Jenin and elsewhere in Palestine
ReplyDelete“Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians…” “Shooting handcuffed prisoners…” “Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted…” These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel’s recent actions in. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Palestine and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government’s response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938. Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that “a large portion of the town should be blown up” as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose. In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive “mine-sweeping taxis” ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order “to reduce [British] land mine casualties.” The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s. British forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938. “When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once busy village except a pile of mangled masonry,” the New York Times reported.
The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police. Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled “When we thought that a village was harboring rebels, we would go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we would blow up the house we would marked.” The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice “The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers.”
MacMichael was furious over what he called the “grossly exaggerated accusations” that England’s critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked “British lives are being lost and I do not think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline.” Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted “not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers.”
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but two stand out. The first is that the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, nevertheless utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces. The second is that when the situation became unbearable, the British could go home; the Israelis, by contrast, have no other place to go.
Fighting and quashing terrorism is a matter of world survival - YJ Draiman
ReplyDeletePut all politics aside - fighting and quashing terrorism is a matter of world survival
The world needs to put together immediately an International task forces to fight terrorism and Muslim extremists. It needs to be a well trained force with substantial resources and manpower as well as an International intelligence cooperation with no restriction. It has to be a unified and cohesive battle to abolish terrorism at all costs. Let the terrorists know that there is no hole they can hide in, that the world terrorist task force and other law enforcement agencies will get them wherever they are. We must shut off all their resources, financing, financial institutions and any source that supply them with any kind of support; weaponry, economic, information, etc. whatsoever.
I urge the world powers at large to take these terrorist events seriously with utmost urgency. The situation is at a critical stage and if immediate all out action is not taken in all parts of the world, terror and mayhem will take over the world and we will not be able to stop it.
Just imagine if one of those terrorist got a hold of a nuclear suitcase bomb. Do I need to describe it any further.
Is there a leader today (please stand up) in the free world who can take the bull by the horn and initiate this global war on terrorism.
YJ Draiman
P.S. God grant me the SERENITY to accept the things I cannot change, the COURAGE to change things that I can, and the WISDOM to know the difference.
Fighting terrorism is not unlike fighting a deadly cancer. It can not be treated just where it is visible - every diseased cell in the body must be destroyed completely with no traces left.
When a poison strikes the human body, the only way to address it, is to remove it and destroy it completely. That is the way the terrorist organizations should be treated.
YJ Draiman
Fighting and quashing terrorism is a matter of world survival - YJ Draiman
ReplyDeletePut all politics aside - fighting and quashing terrorism is a matter of world survival
The world needs to put together immediately an International task forces to fight terrorism and Muslim extremists. It needs to be a well trained force with substantial resources and manpower as well as an International intelligence cooperation with no restriction. It has to be a unified and cohesive battle to abolish terrorism at all costs. Let the terrorists know that there is no hole they can hide in, that the world terrorist task force and other law enforcement agencies will get them wherever they are. We must shut off all their resources, financing, financial institutions and any source that supply them with any kind of support; weaponry, economic, information, etc. whatsoever.
I urge the world powers at large to take these terrorist events seriously with utmost urgency. The situation is at a critical stage and if immediate all out action is not taken in all parts of the world, terror and mayhem will take over the world and we will not be able to stop it.
Just imagine if one of those terrorist got a hold of a nuclear suitcase bomb. Do I need to describe it any further.
Is there a leader today (please stand up) in the free world who can take the bull by the horn and initiate this global war on terrorism.
YJ Draiman
P.S. God grant me the SERENITY to accept the things I cannot change, the COURAGE to change things that I can, and the WISDOM to know the difference.
Fighting terrorism is not unlike fighting a deadly cancer. It can not be treated just where it is visible - every diseased cell in the body must be destroyed completely with no traces left.
When a poison strikes the human body, the only way to address it, is to remove it and destroy it completely. That is the way the terrorist organizations should be treated.
YJ Draiman
How the British Fought Arab Terror in Jenin and elsewhere in Palestine
ReplyDelete“Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians…” “Shooting handcuffed prisoners…” “Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted…” These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel’s recent actions in. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Palestine and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government’s response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938. Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that “a large portion of the town should be blown up” as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose. In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive “mine-sweeping taxis” ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order “to reduce [British] land mine casualties.” The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s. British forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938. “When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once busy village except a pile of mangled masonry,” the New York Times reported.
The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police. Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled “When we thought that a village was harboring rebels, we would go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we would blow up the house we would marked.” The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice “The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers.”
MacMichael was furious over what he called the “grossly exaggerated accusations” that England’s critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked “British lives are being lost and I do not think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline.” Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted “not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers.”
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but two stand out. The first is that the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, nevertheless utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces. The second is that when the situation became unbearable, the British could go home; the Israelis, by contrast, have no other place to go.