Cultural Boycott of Israel "shows intolerance of ultra-left": Richard Humphreys

[Tiocfaidh_Armani]

For more than a thousand years, the only administration which has prohibited Jewish settlement was the Jordanian occupation administration, which during the nineteen years of its rule (1948-1967) declared the sale of land to Jews a capital offense. The right of Jews to establish homes in these areas, and the legal titles to the land which had been acquired, could not be legally invalidated by the Jordanian occupation which resulted from their armed invasion of Israel in 1948, and such rights and titles remain valid to this day. So Jewish settlement on the West bank is not a violation of International law and you saying it, as a slogan, does not make it so

Israel did not transfer any of its citizens/civilians into the West Bank. There's a difference between transfer and voluntary return of individuals to the towns and villages from which they, or their ancestors, had been ousted. Nor does it prohibit the movement of individuals to land which was not under the legitimate sovereignty of any state and which is not subject to private ownership. In this regard, Israeli settlements have been established only after an exhaustive investigation process, under the supervision of the Supreme Court of Israel, designed to ensure that no communities are established on private Arab land. It should be emphasised that the movement of individuals to the territory is entirely voluntary, while the settlements themselves are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they do so in practice

You're sound like an Israeli government spokesperson. I think Jimmy Carter got it right on C4 the other night. Israel wants a one-state solution and that is about making the Palestinians stateless. All this hogwash you come out with, it's actually sickening.

There's a difference between transfer and voluntary return of individuals to the towns and villages from which they, or their ancestors, had been ousted.

I mean, what...the....fu....

[Tiocfaidh_Armani]

As Ballot Stuffer says "People get displaced all the time in war time". But in the palestinian case, having backed the aggressor, who turned out to be the losers, the Palestinians who left were not allowed back after the war. And why should they have been? UN resolution 194 in Dec 48 stated that those refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do that at the earliest practicable date. Now since Israel has every reason to believe that those refugees did not want to live at peace with their Israeli neighbours, then there is a very strong argument that they forfeited their right to return. Tell me, which other state in the world could reasonably be asked to welcome back hundreds of thousands of people who had been taught by their leaders to strive for that state's destruction? Millions of Germans were displaced and expelled from states in Europe after WW11 and they don't have many champions in Europe. So why the double standard?

250,000 Palestinians were displaced before an Arab bullet was fired. Please stop talking mince and defending the cleansing of a people from their homes.Most of the Arab armies were in Palestinian towns defending against attack and to prohibit the cleansing of these villages. Ultimately the force was too weak and didn't put up much of a fight.

[Tiocfaidh_Armani]

Lies and half truths are the staple food of the right wing. Those Arabs who fled their homes and businesses in fear, ahead of the arrival of the israeli seperatists in 1948 were not afforded even the right to compensation for the property stolen from them by Israel and were not allowed back.

Most of them didn't flee they were forced out. Of course your perfectly resonable post there was met with whataboutery.

[flavirostris]

Israel did not transfer any of its citizens/civilians into the West Bank. There's a difference between transfer and voluntary return of individuals to the towns and villages from which they, or their ancestors, had been ousted.

Really? So Jewish settlers from the former Soviet Union and elsewhere were simply "returning" to their homes in the West Bank that they had lived in prior to '67? Do you realise how patently ridiculous that is. Not to mention totally hypocritical.

Why aren't those Arab individuals who were expelled at gunpoint from mandatory Palestine in '48 also allowed to "voluntarily return".

[RepublicOfLuas]

L'Chaim, full of shíte as usual.

[L'Chaim]

250,000 Palestinians were displaced before an Arab bullet was fired. Please stop talking mince and defending the cleansing of a people from their homes.Most of the Arab armies were in Palestinian towns defending against attack and to prohibit the cleansing of these villages. Ultimately the force was too weak and didn't put up much of a fight.

You think so? Yet the Arab world declared war on the state of Israel on the first day it was declared a state and they attacked the new state within hours of it becoming a state. So with all the celebrations that were going on and the few hours before the Arab armies attacked, Israel was able to displace 250,000 Palestinians? You need to go back to your source and read it again.

Mind you, your sources sound dubious if you really think that "most of the Arab armies were in Palestinian towns defending against attack...." considering it was the Arab states that declared war on the new Jewish state on the very first day of the state coming into being and sent their troops to attack Israel.

You should realise that this was a war that Israel did not start and which, if it had lost, would have resulted in the massacre of large sections of the Jewish community and the theft of all the Jewish land. The Arabs who left and became refugees just backed the aggressors and the eventual losers, and as a result found themselves on the wrong side of history

[L'Chaim]

Really? So Jewish settlers from the former Soviet Union and elsewhere were simply "returning" to their homes in the West Bank that they had lived in prior to '67? Do you realise how patently ridiculous that is. Not to mention totally hypocritical.

Why aren't those Arab individuals who were expelled at gunpoint from mandatory Palestine in '48 also allowed to "voluntarily return".

You don't get it; Jewish settlement is allowed on the West Bank. Jews from the Soviet Union (and elsewhere) came to Israel and the West Bank and settled in Jewish communities that had been there for thousands of years, or had been established during the Ottoman empire and later during the British mandate.......before the state of Israel even came about. Or they settled on land that was Jewish owned - bought and paid for- and developed.

The Arabs who left in 48 are not allowed back because they are enemies of the state. Having backed the wrong side in the 48 conflict you couldn't reasonably expect Israel to allow these people, who would not want to live in peace with their neighbours (as per UN resolution 194) back

[CarnivalOfAction]

You don't get it; Jewish settlement is allowed on the West Bank. Jews from the Soviet Union (and elsewhere) came to Israel and the West Bank and settled in Jewish communities that had been there for thousands of years, or had been established during the Ottoman empire and later during the British mandate.......before the state of Israel even came about. Or they settled on land that was Jewish owned - bought and paid for- and developed.

The Arabs who left in 48 are not allowed back because they are enemies of the state. Having backed the wrong side in the 48 conflict you couldn't reasonably expect Israel to allow these people, who would not want to live in peace with their neighbours (as per UN resolution 194) back

The settlers are a gang of thieving & murdering terrorists:

[flavirostris]

You don't get it; Jewish settlement is allowed on the West Bank. Jews from the Soviet Union (and elsewhere) came to Israel and the West Bank and settled in Jewish communities that had been there for thousands of years, or had been established during the Ottoman empire and later during the British mandate.......before the state of Israel even came about. Or they settled on land that was Jewish owned - bought and paid for- and developed.

The Arabs who left in 48 are not allowed back because they are enemies of the state. Having backed the wrong side in the 48 conflict you couldn't reasonably expect Israel to allow these people, who would not want to live in peace with their neighbours (as per UN resolution 194) back

How many Jews lived in the West Bank in 1948?