Comment on: RIBA overturns controversial Israel motion
The right decision. The motion was based on falsehoods and no-one had a chance to rebut them:
Just a shame that the misguided March vote cost RIBA £100,000 in lost bookings and donations.....
Good to see that the RIBA motion went nowhere. It was based on ignorant falsehoods and was sprung on the Council without any opportunity for the lies about Israel to be rebutted. Many RIBA members are justifiably livid that this ill-conceived ill-informed grandstanding cost RIBA at least £100,000 in lost bookings.
The 'apartheid' allegation is an ignorant smear. Just look at the Supreme Court - an Arab Israeli was one of the three Supreme Court Judges who convicted a former President of the State.
As for Tutu, he's just a sordid bigot when it comes to Jews:
It is incumbent on Mr van Rooyen to say precisely WHY the Ritblats are “not impartial”. While he’s at it maybe he can explain how the Palestine Solidarity Campaign supporters who were behind the RIBA motion are ‘impartial'.
The claims that Judea and Samaria are illegally occupied and that Israel has acted contrary to international law are refuted here:
The baseless ‘apartheid’ smear is easily refuted. For example the Supreme Court has an Arab Justice and there are Arabs in the Israeli diplomatic service. Arabs have served in the Cabinet. It was an Arab judge who sentenced a former President of Israel to jail for seven years for a rape conviction.
Khaled Abu Toameh, an Arab journalist, said “If Israel were an apartheid state, I, for example, would not be allowed to work for a Jewish newspaper or live in a Jewish neighbourhood or own a home. The real apartheid is in Lebanon, where there is a law that bans Palestinians from working in over 50 professions. Can you imagine if the Knesset passed a law banning Arabs from working even in one profession? The law of Israel does not distinguish between a Jew and an Arab”.
The RIBA motion was based on incorrect information which demonised Israel - and it seems that it was sprung on the RIBA Council with no chance for the truth to come out.
As such it is entirely appropriate that the motion is going precisely nowhere.
"Not just the disinterested ex British Land boss you would have us believe"
Just what is Alex Seymour insinuating? That Sir John has a financial interest in the fate of this motion?
I think it is incumbent on Mr Seymour to explain.
Abe Hayeem demonstrates yet again that his RIBA motion was based on untruths. How appropriate that it seems to have sunk without trace at UIA.
Israel has NOT contravened the Geneva Convention. Article 49 (6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention states
“The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”.
No court of law has ever found Israel to be in breach of this Article. The Article was written after WW2, when German and Russia forcibly transferred populations. Israel has not forced anyone to move into the West Bank, nor has it displaced local populations. In fact, the Palestinian population within the territories has increased dramatically.