The most well-known case would be that of Deir Yassin:
Deir Yassin massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mostly hype and false rumors, for the purpose of turning the Palestinian population against the Jews. It ended up scaring the hell out of them and causing them to flee.
Plan Dalet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Looks like that has something to do with it as well.
From your link: "Plan Dalet" called for the conquest and securing of Arab towns and villages inside the area alloted to the Jewish state and along its borders. In case of resistance, the population of conquered villages was to be expelled outside the borders of the Jewish state. If no resistance was met, the residents could stay put, under military rule.
Arabs were displaced both prior to and following the war. As for the war itself, of course Arabs would leave; it was a conflict. As for who started the war, what is the point, exactly?
Jews didn't show up to cause a rukus, kick out the natives and set up shop. They were prepared and willing and trying to live peacefully and cooperatively with Arab citizens and neighbors. It wasn't their fault that the Arabs couldn't play nice.
If Israel had not been made a country, there would have been no war. The point?
Creation of Israel does not equal war. It takes two to tango. Had Israel been created and there had been no war, those relocated because of Plan Dalet would have been let back in.
Though it occurs to me... had there been no war... and no Arab hostilities that preceeded the war... there probably wouldn't have been a Plan Dalet to begin with.
You aren't saying Deir Yassin was a false rumour?
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.
Many Palestinians did flee after hearing the fate of the villagers, fearing the same would happen to them. I wouldn't call it unfounded.
If I made up some **** to scare the hell out of you regarding the behavior of your next door neighbors, whose fault is it that if you end up moving out of your house... your neighbors whom I made stuff up about? Or me?
Read up on the situation:
Myths & Facts Online - The Refugees
As for Israel being more than willing, I'm curious to read statements to that effect.
MYTH
“Israel refused to allow Palestinians to return to their homes so Jews could steal their property.”
FACT
Israel could not simply agree to allow all Palestinians to return, but consistently sought a solution to the refugee problem. Israel’s position was expressed by David Ben-Gurion (August 1, 1948):
When the Arab states are ready to conclude a peace treaty with Israel this question will come up for constructive solution as part of the general settlement, and with due regard to our counter*claims in respect of the destruction of Jewish life and property, the long-term interest of the Jewish and Arab populations, the stability of the State of Israel and the durability of the basis of peace between it and its neighbors, the actual position and fate of the Jewish communities in the Arab countries, the responsibilities of the Arab governments for their war of aggression and their liability for reparation, will all be relevant in the question whether, to what extent, and under what conditions, the former Arab residents of the territory of Israel should be allowed to return.
The Israeli government was not indifferent to the plight of the refugees; an ordinance was passed creating a Custodian of Abandoned Property “to prevent unlawful occupation of empty houses and business premises, to administer ownerless property, and also to secure tilling of deserted fields, and save the crops....”
The implied danger of repatriation did not prevent Israel from allowing some refugees to return and offering to take back a substantial number as a condition for signing a peace treaty. In 1949, Israel offered to allow families that had been separated during the war to return, to release refugee accounts frozen in Israeli banks (eventually released in 1953), to pay compensation for abandoned lands and to repatriate 100,000 refugees.
The Arabs rejected all the Israeli compromises. They were unwilling to take any action that might be construed as recognition of Israel. They made repatriation a precondition for negotiations, something Israel rejected. The result was the confinement of the refugees in camps.
Despite the position taken by the Arab states, Israel did release the Arab refugees’ blocked bank accounts, which totaled more than $10 million, paid thousands of claimants cash compensation and granted thousands of acres as alternative holdings.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths2/Refugees.html#m8
I totally agree with all of that... except for the last sentence. "Teaching Israel a lesson"? What is that supposed to mean?
Expecting them to shoulder the responsibility for something that isn't their responsibility. To have people that are angry and hostile against Israel, so much that they won't acknowledge the legitimacy and sovereignty of the State of Israel, to just walk back in when they have no intention of making peace.
I might be exaggerating on that particular statement, but the point is, Israel is more help than harm to the Palestinians. And could be infinitely more helpful if only the Palestinians would accept the State of Israel's existence, and start cooperating with Israel instead of struggling against them.
Do I need to rehash the woes Israel has bestowed upon Palestinians? Of course, some things can be blamed on the Palestinian leadership, militias, and so on. But living under occupation doesn't affect their living standards or way of life much, I suppose?
"occupation" as if they're a sovereign entity being controlled by a foreign power
The fact that they're going to the UN to attain statehood is an indication that they're not already a state. They wouldn't accept the partition plan, and they wouldn't accept peace. They wouldn't accept Israel, and they wouldn't accept the land the UN set aside for them. When Egypt had Gaza and Jordan had the West Bank, where was a Palestinian state then? Or even a desire for self determination?
Israel isn't damaging the Palestinians' way of life. Between themselves and their Arab neighbors, they're doing the damage to themselves. The Palestinian leaders are agenda driven and greedy, and don't care about the welfare of their people. If they did, there would have been peace 60 years ago.
How about those that wish to become Israeli citizens?
There's no problem with people wishing to become Israeli citizens. But how many of them do you figure wish to become Israeli citizens?
You ask your question as if it's Israel that refuses them. No. They refuse Israel. When they change their tune to one of peace, rather than resistance, Israel will be the best friend they could ever hope to have.
