[Tailz]

Ben-Gurion in 1951: Only Death Penalty Will Deter Jews From Gratuitous Killing of Arabs

'Until a Jewish soldier is hanged for murdering Arabs, these acts of murder won’t end,' Israel’s first prime minister told his stunned cabinet 66 years ago, when Jewish murders of Arabs had become all too common.

“I’m not the justice minister, I’m not the police minister and I don’t know all criminal acts committed here, but as defense minister I know some of the crimes, and I must say the situation is frightening in two areas: 1) acts of murder and 2) acts of rape.” So declared Prime Minister and Defense Minister David Ben-Gurion in 1951 before dropping a bombshell: “People in the [General] Staff tell me, and it’s my view as well, that until a Jewish soldier is hanged for murdering Arabs, these acts of murder won’t end.”

Ben-Gurion was speaking at a cabinet meeting on abolishing the death penalty. Jewish-Arab tensions were high following the 1948 War of Independence, and there was also a problem with infiltrators: Arab refugees seeking to return to the homes and fields they left during the war. Consequently, Jewish murders of Arabs had proliferated, and some ministers considered the death penalty necessary to solve this problem.

The cabinet discussion of 66 years ago is particularly interesting in light of this week’s very different cabinet discussion about a soldier who killed a wounded Palestinian terrorist in Hebron after he no longer posed a threat.

“In general, those who have guns use them,” Ben-Gurion asserted, adding that some Israelis “think Jews are people but Arabs aren’t, so you can do anything to them. And some think it’s a mitzvah to kill Arabs, and that everything the government says against murdering Arabs isn’t serious, that it’s just a pretense that killing Arabs is forbidden, but in fact, it’s a blessing because there will be fewer Arabs here. As long as they think that, the murders won’t stop.”

Ben-Gurion said he, too, would prefer fewer Arabs, but not at the price of murder. “Abolishing the death penalty will increase bloodshed,” he warned, especially between Jews and Arabs. “Soon, we won’t be able to show our faces to the world. Jews meet an Arab and murder him.”

The cabinet first discussed abolishing the death penalty – a legacy of the British Mandate – in July 1949, at the urging of Justice Minister Pinhas Rosen. Ben-Gurion was dubious even then. He said he would support the bill, but was almost certain the death penalty would ultimately be reinstated, because abolishing it “will lead to a proliferation of murders.” After intense debate, the cabinet agreed to abolish the death sentence except for treason during a state of emergency.

The bill then went to the Knesset, where the Constitution Committee held lengthy deliberations. A year later, Rosen presented the cabinet with a problem: Seven prisoners were on death row, but their executions were being delayed until the Knesset made up its mind about the death penalty.

As the cabinet discussed this issue, Ben-Gurion stunned his colleagues by saying he no longer supported abolishing the death penalty, primarily due to an increase in killings of Arabs by Jewish soldiers.
Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, who in 1949 had supported abolishing the death penalty on the grounds that “Human society must aspire to a moral level at which it’s forbidden to take human life,” also unexpectedly reversed himself at this meeting.

“With great regret I’ve become convinced that abolishing the death penalty is inconceivable,” he announced, noting that even countries “which are immeasurably more humane than we are – I’ve spent years there and I live here – maintain the death penalty.”

The main reason for his U-turn, however, was “the crimes that have happened and are happening week after week, especially in the army,” including some that weren’t public knowledge. Sociopaths might not be deterred by the death penalty, Sharett admitted, “but that Jewish chap who kills two Arabs he met on the road, I’m not willing to say, without trying it first, that he’s a killer by nature and won’t fear the death penalty.”

Some Jews, Sharett said, think “every Arab is a dog, a wild dog that it’s a mitzvah to kill.” And “to save them from killing human beings, it’s a mitzvah to have the death penalty here. As long as we don’t have it, these murders will continue, and we’ll be held accountable, and it will create moral corruption here.

“I’ve giving a speech of repentance and confession here,” he continued. “I’ve learned from experience that in this country, the death penalty is necessary... We made a mistake when we stopped hanging... If all the crimes committed in this country were reported, terror would grip the public and lynchings would start. I’d shoot a Jewish chap who wanted to shoot an Arab passerby if that were the way to save him.”

Sharett then described one case in which three Arabs were killed and a fourth saved only because a Jew threw him into a hut, and another case in which two Indian Jews were almost killed by fellow Jews who thought they were Arabs until they shouted “Israel.”

Minister Dov Yosef backed Ben-Gurion and Sharett. “In principle, I’ve opposed hanging as a penalty all my life, but unfortunately, in this country and today’s situation,” it’s needed, he said.

Minister Haim-Moshe Shapira concurred, saying he was especially horrified by group killings. He cited one in which “eight soldiers were present at the time of the murder. Surely they didn’t all murder, but they were all present at the time of the crime and not one member of this group stopped the crime.”

“There have been worse cases,” Ben-Gurion responded.

Ministers Golda Myerson (later Meir) and David Remez, in contrast, remained opposed to the death penalty, but agreed that much more must be done to prevent crimes against Arabs.

In the end, the death penalty was abolished – but only three years later, in 1954.

I have to say, that when I read this article, I was astounded. Here is the man who maybe did the most to further the creation of the Jewish state, putting forth that the state needs to maintain the Death Penalty in order to have a punishment so harsh as to make Jews - he mentions Jews specifically - think twice about casually killing an Arab. He (Ben-Gurion) and Minister Haim-Moshe Shapira mention that they both know of crimes that fit the criteria, and "...there know of worse cases..." according to Ben-Gurion. Crimes that have spurned these men of Israeli politics who themselves - do not back the death Penalty as a punishment held by a cultured people - but here we have them, backing the death penalty in 1951 because of "...today’s situation..." as Minister Dov Yosef said. I wonder what he or Ben-Gurion would say today given recent events? An Arab family burned alive in their home, a kid snatched off the street beaten ad then burned alive, an execution captured on video. Certainly there are Arabs attacking Jews, but there are Jews attacking Arabs and according to director of the IDF operations directorate, Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon - many of those attacks by Arabs are spurred on by Israeli Settler violence against the Palestinians.

I wonder if Ben-Gurion would still back the death penalty today as he did in 1951.

To be clear, I don't support the death penalty, because you can not release a person from death when new evidence exonerates that person of the crime.

[wat0n]

He would, I think, just as he would have long realized that many of the current Israeli policies are nonsense.

[Pongo]

Fascinating reading indeed. The problem is EU-paid paper has different agenda in advancing this theme now. Ben Gurion was all about Jewish state, as Taliz noticed rightly, Haaretz on the the other hand doesn't believe in Zionism. And its only mission is to advance EU foreign policy and weakening Israel position.

One more issue in this problem. If there would be death penalty against the Jews, only the outgroup had to be suffered. One of the main reason Rabin was murdered in 1994 was his execution of Ben Gurion order to fire the Irgun ship of Altalena. So you can see that the outgroup which its blood seemed cheap by the establishment harbored hatred that lasted for for few generation until they killed Rabin. Of course Taliz doesn't care about Jewish internal cohesion. The Arab rights are the only one that matters to him.

[wat0n]

Oh, Jewish cohesion is definitely important, which is why it was great that neither Rabin nor Ben Gurion would allow the Irgun to turn the nascent Israel into Lebanon by setting up a state within a state, and made their point clear by sinking the Altalena.

The sinking of the Altalena was one of the most important, fateful moments in Israeli history and thankfully it turned out alright.

[Pongo]

Wat0n, you can't get how bitter they were. Of course on the paper Ben Gurion was right but he wouldn't dare to kill Jews from his own ingroup.

Rabin was murdered on delay for his responsibility.

[youtube]YX5yEggPIao[/youtube]

[danholo]

It's starting to look like Jews don't care about internal cohesion... We certainly lack that in our community here. Anyway, the current stance by many for the deranged soldier who murdered the terrorist is against any type of cohesion and support for a lawful and orderly society.

[Pongo]

The EU has an interest to destroy Israeli internal cohesion. Like the Judenrite in the Holocaust they have enough Jews who will serve them.

[danholo]

I don't know what you are talking about. Sounds like conspiracies to me. Honestly, if you shoot an incapacitated person, it's murder and unacceptable, at least to any seemingly civilized society. I don't know what cohesion there is for the EU to be the one to disrupt it.

I'm sorry but Israel is a fundementally fragmented society; you have staunch secular liberal pocket, secular nationalist pocket and add to that all the different religious societies, so I don't think you can blame anyone but Israel itself from its lack of cohesion. I think this is a richness because it is so diverse but cohesion simply isn't something you feel in the country. The opinions are just too polarized. Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are worlds apart you feel it in the air. The former is like going to Europe, the latter some sort of amalgamation of religious-secular bohemian oddities. Haifa was also very different to both of these.

[Heinie]

Hatred of the Palestinians Arabs was a characteristic of the Zionists from the beginning. After all, if you are going to take the homeland of the indigenous Arabs it is a prerequisite to dehumanize them as Untermensch. It is a familiar racist trait.

[pugsville]

the delusional history of the Israeli right is a wonder to behold.

the Irgun were terrorists and murderers.

[Zionist Nationalist]

Israel need a death penalty for terrorist

execute them them mutilate their bodies and bury them with pigs

[danholo]

That's some hardcore stuff right there. Are you willing to do it?

[Zionist Nationalist]

Yeah no problem if they pay enough

[wat0n]

It's starting to look like Jews don't care about internal cohesion... We certainly lack that in our community here.

What, Jews and Zionists are not a hive-mind after all?!

[danholo]

Yeah no problem if they pay enough

Ok, then. At least you're not a hypocrite, I'll give you that.

[Pongo]

I'm sorry but Israel is a fundementally fragmented society; you have staunch secular liberal pocket, secular nationalist pocket and add to that all the different religious societies, so I don't think you can blame anyone but Israel itself from its lack of cohesion. I think this is a richness because it is so diverse but cohesion simply isn't something you feel in the country. The opinions are just too polarized. Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are worlds apart you feel it in the air. The former is like going to Europe, the latter some sort of amalgamation of religious-secular bohemian oddities. Haifa was also very different to both of these.

For this reason that Israel is so fragmented it should be careful that the stronger party will not execute its deadly power over the weaker party. Even if the soldier was wrong, for the people of Israel matters one thing. Will the state be even handed to all parts of the society as they were quick to prosecute this soldier? Of course not. Case closed. For this reason alone a mob was gathered outside the military court not letting the dominant group to abuse the rights of their marginal group.

[danholo]

What do you mean of course not?

[Pongo]

Of course not. The soldier is of Moroccan origin from provincial town of Beer Sheva and football fan of Beitar. No Israeli elite group sees him as part of their community. Only the mob that gathered outside the court from all over provincial towns were ready do defend him. Because of this boiling anger, the state was quickly forced to relinquish their attempt to make him test case. Do you know how many violent actions by the settlers were remained uninvestigated because their powerful agents protected them? If there is no even justice to all, don't try to start it with the weakest ring because the people are not fool.

[Rich]

The EU has an interest to destroy Israeli internal cohesion. Like the Judenrite in the Holocaust they have enough Jews who will serve them.

Yeah well it might help if there weren't so many politically prominent Zionists seeking to destroy our western societies. Some of them are so openly blatant about it, their top two priorities are defence of Israel and mass immigration. They're proud of it. If Israelis want Europeans and White Americans to support them in their struggle against Islamic barbarism, they need to denounce any Zionist that supports mass immigration into western countries.

Its true that many opponents of Israel are motivated by wicked hate filled racism, but this is not anti Jewish racism, its an anti White, anti Infidel racism. These people want to wipe Germany, Britain and the United States off the map just as much as they do Israel.

[Pongo]

^ it's right wing antisemitic propaganda. Jews who support mass immigration are usually anti Zionist left wing, a BDS lot, what it has do with all Jews, let along Israel?