Israel Palestine Conflict?

[loverOfTruth]

Again this whole canard of "Unfairly dividing Palestine". All you've proven is that Arabs outnumbered Jews west of the Jordan in 1890, and then you call the source I presented showing the Arab immigration biased. And then the Peel Commission seems to only be including data from well after that period. And we see that in 1850, there weren't even that many Arabs in the whole territory altogether, let alone the sheer increase that migrated west of the Jordan by 1890. Why don't you show an unbiased source that shows the exact Arab population west of the Jordan in the 1850s without accusing me of shifting the goal posts. Otherwise, admit that your data only indicates the shift after the 1890s.

There's no goal post moving. I showed you witness accounts that there was massive Arab immigration by 1890, and that's probably why your numbers of Arabs west of the Jordan only begins after 1890. Call it a biased source or not.

Call it moving the goal posts all you want. There is no proof that there were many Arabs west of the Jordan before 1890. Your source for 1850 only includes the region as a whole and most likely means "Transjordan".

The point is that the report is most likely only talking about RECENT increases and not as a whole.

Again, your source is 1890. That's my point. Try showing a source BEFORE that date for the regional specifics.

Same thing.
...

That quote says nothing about population stats before 1890 which you have trouble finding.
"
The fact twisting is the idea that there were large Arab populations west of the Jordan before the 1890s. When you can find a source that details the Muslim population West of the Jordan as opposed to the whole Ottoman Territory called "Palestine" which includes Transjordan, let me know. Or is that moving the goal posts?

It is interesting to see how you keep avoiding information I have already provided and keep brushing them off as irrelevant or 'most likely not this or that'. Ok, I'll present it for the one last time to expose your lies.

In his paper 'Demography in Israel/Palestine: Trends, Prospects and Policy Implications'[7] Sergio DellaPergola, drawing on the work of Bachi (1975), provides rough estimates of the population of Palestine west of the River Jordan by religion groups. See extracts for 1800 and 1890. Please note that this data is specifically for population West of Jordan River not entire Palestine or TransJordan.

Population Count West of Jordan River 1800-1890
Year Jews Christians Muslims Total
1800 7,000 22 246,000 275
1890 43,000 57 432,000 532
614% 175% Percentage Increase In approximately 90 years

So this clearly shows that there were already significant number of Muslim population west of Jordan. Not only that, the increase of population percentage was actually higher for Jews(614% increase) than Muslims(175%) from 1800 to 1890 (over 90 years). So the mass Arab immigration talk is once again a non-sense.

You can read the full paper here. The above data it is not from any biased Arab or Palestinian source.See below.
Sergio DellaPergola
The A. Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Mt. Scopus. Jerusalem 91905, Israel

http://212.95.240.146/Brazil2001/s60/S64_02_dellapergola.pdf


Once again, according to Alexander Scholch, a German JEW AND Professor or Middle Eastern Studies, towns west of Jordan had significantly higher Muslim population even in 1850 [1]. The table below shows, as an example, number of households in a few major towns West of Jordan.

Number of Households in towns West of Jordan in 1850

Town Jews Christians Muslims
Jerusalem 630 738 1025
Hebron 200 2800
Nablus 14 108 1356
Haifa 8 228 224

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Palestine

Now you wanna ask about data before 1800 ? Thanks I have no intention of playing your 'goal post moving' game to try to support your lies. Try your Zionist propaganda lies somewhere else please - at least not flying here on the face of the historical facts and evidences.

 

[Shermana]

Okay I'll look into that, I must have missed the post where you included the 1800 date for WEST OF THE JORDAN RIVER, can you refer which post you first mentioned that in?

 

[loverOfTruth]

Okay I'll look into that, I must have missed the post where you included the 1800 date for WEST OF THE JORDAN RIVER, can you refer which post you first mentioned that in?

I have noted the 1890 population specifically for West of Jordan River (not entire palestine) and provided you the source for that data where if you looked just one row up, you would have seen the 1800 data as well.

Also, I have noted the 1850 population(# of households) of Jerusalem(i.e. towns West of Jordan River) and provided you the source where you could see other similar data of town populations West of Jordan River.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3165604-post275.html

 

[Shermana]

I have noted the 1890 population specifically for West of Jordan River (not entire palestine) and provided you the source for that data where if you looked just one row up, you would have seen the 1800 data as well.

Also, I have noted the 1850 population(# of households) of Jerusalem(i.e. towns West of Jordan River) and provided you the source where you could see other similar data of town populations West of Jordan River.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3165604-post275.html

The 1890 Population is not what I'm concerned with as I stated, that just shows the population after the massive emigration from Syria, Iraq, Egypt, and Transjordan.

All I see that's related to what I asked was:

According to Alexander Scholch, Palestine in 1850 had about 350,000 inhabitants, 30% of whom lived in 13 towns; roughly 85% were Muslims, 11% were Christians and 4% Jews. In Jerusalem itself, at that time, there were 1025 Muslim households compared to 630 Jewish households compared to 738 Christian households.[3]

Which even if true, is apparently unbiased but my source claiming that there were massive movements by Arabs from other countries, sometimes to the point of 10 Arabs for every Jewish, is written off as biased? With that said, since there were practically no Arabs in the North or West of Judea-Samaria ("The West Bank") unless someone can show me, the vast majority of those 300,000 Muslims in "Palestine" must have been predominantly in Transjordan. I'd like to see exactly where and how Sergio gets his numbers from, since its a 1975 estimate.

Same with Scholch. I'd like to see where he gets his numbers from. Being a Jew means nothing in terms of his objectivity by the way, look at Chomsky and the Finkelsteins.

 

[loverOfTruth]

The 1890 Population is not what I'm concerned with as I stated, that just shows the population after the massive emigration from Syria, Iraq, Egypt, and Transjordan.

All I see that's related to what I asked was:




Which even if true, is apparently unbiased but my source claiming that there were massive movements by Arabs from other countries, sometimes to the point of 10 Arabs for every Jewish, is written off as biased? With that said, since there were practically no Arabs in the North or West of Judea-Samaria ("The West Bank") unless someone can show me, the vast majority of those 300,000 Muslims in "Palestine" must have been predominantly in Transjordan. I'd like to see exactly where and how Sergio gets his numbers from, since its a 1975 estimate.

Same with Scholch. I'd like to see where he gets his numbers from. Being a Jew means nothing in terms of his objectivity by the way, look at Chomsky and the Finkelsteins.

Yes, just by becoming a Jew, no one becomes Objective by default - but a Jew wouldn't go out of their way to become biased about supporting the Arabs/Palestinians who is trying to get their land back from the Jews unless of course that is the Truth and He(that Jew) wants to stand up for Justice and Truth. Just common sense.

Anyway, it seems just as I thought - after I showed you everything you have asked for - you come up with new excuses. I think we are done here.

 

[Shermana]

Yes, just by becoming a Jew, no one becomes Objective by default - but a Jew wouldn't go out of their way to become biased about supporting the Arabs/Palestinians who is trying to get their land back from the Jews unless of course that is the Truth and He(that Jew) wants to stand up for Justice and Truth. Just common sense.

Anyway, it seems just as I thought - after I showed you everything you have asked for - you come up with new excuses. I think we are done here.

New excuses? Huh? All I did was ask for their methodology on how they get their numbers. So my source from the time period in question is too biased and can't be trusted, and your source from 1975 is totally objective, no need to get into how they derive their numbers.

I think we're done here indeed.

And yes, there are in fact some Jews who are vehemently against the state of Israel and their Jewish identity (Cough Finkelstein, cough Chomsky) for politically expedient reasons, believe it or not. There's also Muslims (and some Arabs) who support the State of Israel and denounce the concept of "Palestine" even. Imagine that!

 

[loverOfTruth]

New excuses? Huh? All I did was ask for their methodology on how they get their numbers. So my source from the time period in question is too biased and can't be trusted, and your source from 1975 is totally objective, no need to get into how they derive their numbers.

I think we're done here indeed.

And yes, there are in fact some Jews who are vehemently against the state of Israel and their Jewish identity (Cough Finkelstein, cough Chomsky) for politically expedient reasons, believe it or not. There's also Muslims (and some Arabs) who support the State of Israel and denounce the concept of "Palestine" even. Imagine that!

Once again - nice try. More you do this, more it is exposing your hypocrisy and the lies. As if you go and check the methodologies used by every scholarly paper, book referenced. So what is the methodology used by the sources you have provided ?

Oh wait - forget about methodology - one of your source is an unknown letter from Y. Grazavsky to Y. Eisenstadt.

And another one of your source is the most biased Zionist Propagandist Yitzhak Ben-Zvi.
"Yitzhak Ben-Zvi (24 November 1884 – 23 April 1963; Hebrew: יצחק בן צבי‎, Arabic: يتسحاق بن تصفي‎ Yitsihaq Bin Tusafi) was a historian, Labor Zionist leader, the second and longest-serving President of Israel.
...
Together, they also wrote the Yiddish book The Land of Israel Past and Present to promote the Zionist cause among American Jewry." [1]

And yet another one of your source is Émile Meyerson who served as the director of the Jewish Colonization Association for Europe and Asia Minor. [2]

The Lublin-born French epistemologist and philosopher of science Émile Meyerson died in 1933, but is still remembered for his dedicated Zionism and friendship with fellow Jews, such as author and activist Bernard Lazare.[3]


[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Ben-Zvi
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89mile_Meyerson
[3]http://blogs.forward.com/the-arty-semite/147707/in-bed-with-emile-meyerson/

Nice try in avoiding to accepting the facts and historical data provided.

 

[Lady B]

Fear God, Dingbat and Lover of truth , hi guys! As I have had many great discussions with all 3 of you in the past and I respect your minds ,I would like to challenge you somewhat, if I may?
May I ask you how you all specifically would like to see this conflict resolved? Lets play pretend for a moment and each of you are made king for a day, ruler of the middle east all powers have been given to you and all responsibility for success or failure ( pssst.I know it seems silly but work with me here..)
here are the presups:
what will you command to both sides in order to settle this once and for all ? If you divide lands, show us the lines, if you decide one side leave Israel completely, tell us the land you will give them to go.

What do you see is fair for all ? And why is it fair? Feel free to use your religion as your guide.

And how would you go about in implementing your ideas today at this very hour? Which side would you approach first and how would you approach it, military or peacefully?

I am not limiting this challenge to these alone but I am looking for a Muslim or Palestinian empathizers view only right now please. soooo.. Any takers?

I am bringing this post back so that Lover Of Truth can reply...after all these statistical debates I am even more curious how you see this probelm could be solved If it can be solved.

 

[Shermana]

Once again - nice try. More you do this, more it is exposing your hypocrisy and the lies. As if you go and check the methodologies used by every scholarly paper, book referenced. So what is the methodology used by the sources you have provided ?

Okay, so it's hypocrisy and lies to want to know how a 1975 paper gets its methodology, got it.

Oh wait - forget about methodology - one of your source is an unknown letter from Y. Grazavsky to Y. Eisenstadt.

As opposed to the source for your data's data? I do like how you say "Forget about Methodology", thank you for revealing that you want to forget about Methodology for your own source. I appreciate it.

And another one of your source is the most biased Zionist Propagandist Yitzhak Ben-Zvi.
"Yitzhak Ben-Zvi (24 November 1884 – 23 April 1963; Hebrew: יצחק בן צבי‎, Arabic: يتسحاق بن تصفي‎ Yitsihaq Bin Tusafi) was a historian, Labor Zionist leader, the second and longest-serving President of Israel.

Ah, so unreliable. But of course a paper from 1975 needs no inference as to its data source.
...

Together, they also wrote the Yiddish book The Land of Israel Past and Present to promote the Zionist cause among American Jewry." [1]

And yet another one of your source is Émile Meyerson who served as the director of the Jewish Colonization Association for Europe and Asia Minor. [2]

Guess it just can't be trusted, we must believe it's total lies. But if I ask for the methodology of a 1975 paper's data, I'm being a hypocrite.

The Lublin-born French epistemologist and philosopher of science Émile Meyerson died in 1933, but is still remembered for his dedicated Zionism and friendship with fellow Jews, such as author and activist Bernard Lazare.[3]

Yep, totally can't be trusted, must be lying. But of course, asking for how numbers crunched in 1975 is asking too much. Was that German Jew an anti-Zionist by the way? I guess if they're anti-Zionist they must be unbiased.

So we see here that any information by Zionists can't be trusted, but informaiton by anti-Zionists can't. Thanks for pointing this out.

Nice try in avoiding to accepting the facts and historical data provided.

What historical data? That's what I'm trying to get you to prove, and you've dodged and danced when asked each time.

So once again, where did the 1975 study get its data from, and why is it so hard to find raw data for the pre-1890 period on West Jordan populations?

 

[loverOfTruth]

Okay, so it's hypocrisy and lies to want to know how a 1975 paper gets its methodology, got it.

As opposed to the source for your data's data? I do like how you say "Forget about Methodology", thank you for revealing that you want to forget about Methodology for your own source. I appreciate it.
Ah, so unreliable. But of course a paper from 1975 needs no inference as to its data source.
...
Guess it just can't be trusted, we must believe it's total lies. But if I ask for the methodology of a 1975 paper's data, I'm being a hypocrite.

Yep, totally can't be trusted, must be lying. But of course, asking for how numbers crunched in 1975 is asking too much. Was that German Jew an anti-Zionist by the way? I guess if they're anti-Zionist they must be unbiased.

So we see here that any information by Zionists can't be trusted, but informaiton by anti-Zionists can't. Thanks for pointing this out.



What historical data? That's what I'm trying to get you to prove, and you've dodged and danced when asked each time.

So once again, where did the 1975 study get its data from, and why is it so hard to find raw data for the pre-1890 period on West Jordan populations?

Let me repeat - 'No, it is not hypocrisy to just want to know how a 1975 paper gets its methodology'.

However, It is a big Hypocrisy to ask for the methodology of data for some scholarly paper just because it is from 1975 and because it crushes your claim of mass Arab Immigration WHILE NOT PROVIDING the methodologies for data for your own sources which you cited from
a) a 1971 writing by a Labor Zionist leader and President of Israel (who also wrote a book to promote the Zionist cause among American Jewry)
b) a 1914 report by someone who served as the director of the Jewish Colonization Association (who is also remembered for his dedicated Zionism)
c)an unknown letter written in 1889

Furthermore, I have shown you clearly how the sources you have cited were actively involved in supporting Zionism and hence to any reasonable person would not be considered a non-biased source.

On the other hand, I could not find anything 'anti-zionist' about any of the sources I have provided. In fact, one of my sources, Sergio Della Pergola, "is an Italian-born Israeli professor and demographic expert, widely acknowledged as the leading authority in demography and statistics related to the Jewish population all over the world."[1]. Not to mention that the paper written by Sergio states the following in the footnote : "While this paper is written with an effort of objectivity, the author is aware he may have stressed an Israeli point of view in some of the judgements expressed below." So this is straight from the author - now you wanna call it biased towards Arabs - be my guest (any sensible person will be able to tell the difference).

If you can show me signs of their active involvement in support of 'anti-zionism' for some worldly gain even after being a Jew, I wouldn't have any problem accepting them as 'biased' sources.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_DellaPergola

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The phrase "talking to the wall" comes to mind.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Let me repeat - 'No, it is not hypocrisy to just want to know how a 1975 paper gets its methodology'.

However, It is a big Hypocrisy to ask for the methodology of data for some scholarly paper just because it is from 1975 and because it crushes your claim of mass Arab Immigration WHILE NOT PROVIDING the methodologies for data for your own sources which you cited from
a) a 1971 writing by a Labor Zionist leader and President of Israel (who also wrote a book to promote the Zionist cause among American Jewry)
b) a 1914 report by someone who served as the director of the Jewish Colonization Association (who is also remembered for his dedicated Zionism)
c)an unknown letter written in 1889

Furthermore, I have shown you clearly how the sources you have cited were actively involved in supporting Zionism and hence to any reasonable person would not be considered a non-biased source.

On the other hand, I could not find anything 'anti-zionist' about any of the sources I have provided. In fact, one of my sources, Sergio Della Pergola, "is an Italian-born Israeli professor and demographic expert, widely acknowledged as the leading authority in demography and statistics related to the Jewish population all over the world."[1]. Not to mention that the paper written by Sergio states the following in the footnote : "While this paper is written with an effort of objectivity, the author is aware he may have stressed an Israeli point of view in some of the judgements expressed below." So this is straight from the author - now you wanna call it biased towards Arabs - be my guest (any sensible person will be able to tell the difference).

If you can show me signs of their active involvement in support of 'anti-zionism' for some worldly gain even after being a Jew, I wouldn't have any problem accepting them as 'biased' sources.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_DellaPergola

Frubals for scholarship. :clap

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It was, indeed, rather well done.

 

[Shermana]

Frubals for scholarship. :clap

Yes, scholarship for a 1975 study that has no methodology.

Kudos for agreeing with him that methodology is not important in such "scholarship".

It's quite obvious that the Liberals and those who are against Israeli claims on Judea-Samaria are the ones who digest this kind of "information" without question. Quite telling.

Because not a single Israeli has ever shown bias against Israeli claims on Judea-Samaria.

I love support for scholarship that doesn't involve showing its methodology as much as the "scholarship" itself.

 

[Shermana]

The phrase "talking to the wall" comes to mind.

Yes, indeed, when a person repeatedly dismisses a concern about the methodology of a study, it's talking to a wall indeed.

Unless of course you're saying I'm the wall for wanting to know how a 1975 study got its data.

 

[Shermana]

Let me repeat - 'No, it is not hypocrisy to just want to know how a 1975 paper gets its methodology'.

Okay, so it's not hypocrisy to ask for the Methodology.

However, It is a big Hypocrisy to ask for the methodology of data for some scholarly paper just because it is from 1975 and because it crushes your claim of mass Arab Immigration WHILE NOT PROVIDING the methodologies for data for your own sources which you cited from

Fine, the methodology was FIRST HAND ACCOUNT. Could have been lying.

But you have not provided the methodology. So he could be lying too.

SO to compromise, I will admit that my source could have been lying and making it up if you will too. Now with that said, is it still hypocritical to want to know how they got their numbers?

a) a 1971 writing by a Labor Zionist leader and President of Israel (who also wrote a book to promote the Zionist cause among American Jewry)

Many Labor Zionists, though I agree with their initial aims, have liberal tendencies to try to appease the anti-Zionists. See Haa'retz for example.

b) a 1914 report by someone who served as the director of the Jewish Colonization Association (who is also remembered for his dedicated Zionism)
c)an unknown letter written in 1889

And did you list what that 1914 report says about the West Jordan populations before 1890?

Furthermore, I have shown you clearly how the sources you have cited were actively involved in supporting Zionism and hence to any reasonable person would not be considered a non-biased source.

Supporting Zionism as the State of Israel is one thing. SUpporting Zionism while making claims against populations in the "West Bank" is another, and is a common "ZIonist" position to try to go against claims against Judea-Samaria. I could make a whole thread on this.

On the other hand, I could not find anything 'anti-zionist' about any of the sources I have provided. In fact, one of my sources, Sergio Della Pergola, "is an Italian-born Israeli professor and demographic expert, widely acknowledged as the leading authority in demography and statistics related to the Jewish population all over the world."[1]. Not to mention that the paper written by Sergio states the following in the footnote : "While this paper is written with an effort of objectivity, the author is aware he may have stressed an Israeli point of view in some of the judgements expressed below." So this is straight from the author - now you wanna call it biased towards Arabs - be my guest (any sensible person will be able to tell the difference).

Norman Finkelstein is Israeli born and said by some to even be a defender of Israel despite trying to downplay Jewish population movements.

WIth that said, I want to see how he got his numbers. I think its fair to ask.

And for "Stressing an Israeli point of view", what does that mean even?

If you can show me signs of their active involvement in support of 'anti-zionism' for some worldly gain even after being a Jew, I wouldn't have any problem accepting them as 'biased' sources.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_DellaPergola

[/quote]

I'll take a look. Again, just because a person supports the State of Israel doesn't make them objective if their goal is to try to placate the Anti-Zionist interests by throwing claims to Judea SAmaria under the bus. There are plenty of defenders of the State of Israel who are all too happy to pick away at its claims.

So until I see some actual raw data for the pre 1890 populations, we're gonna have to agree to disagree.

Where's Caladan when you need him?

 

[loverOfTruth]

Okay, so it's not hypocrisy to ask for the Methodology.

Fine, the methodology was FIRST HAND ACCOUNT. Could have been lying.

But you have not provided the methodology. So he could be lying too.

SO to compromise, I will admit that my source could have been lying and making it up if you will too. Now with that said, is it still hypocritical to want to know how they got their numbers?

Many Labor Zionists, though I agree with their initial aims, have liberal tendencies to try to appease the anti-Zionists. See Haa'retz for example.

And did you list what that 1914 report says about the West Jordan populations before 1890?

Supporting Zionism as the State of Israel is one thing. SUpporting Zionism while making claims against populations in the "West Bank" is another, and is a common "ZIonist" position to try to go against claims against Judea-Samaria. I could make a whole thread on this.

Norman Finkelstein is Israeli born and said by some to even be a defender of Israel despite trying to downplay Jewish population movements.

WIth that said, I want to see how he got his numbers. I think its fair to ask.

And for "Stressing an Israeli point of view", what does that mean even?


I'll take a look. Again, just because a person supports the State of Israel doesn't make them objective if their goal is to try to placate the Anti-Zionist interests by throwing claims to Judea SAmaria under the bus. There are plenty of defenders of the State of Israel who are all too happy to pick away at its claims.

So until I see some actual raw data for the pre 1890 populations, we're gonna have to agree to disagree.

Where's Caladan when you need him?

I am tired of repeating the same thing over and over again...I am done here. I'll just post one last message for Lady B. Thanks and Peace to you.

 

[loverOfTruth]

I am bringing this post back so that Lover Of Truth can reply...after all these statistical debates I am even more curious how you see this probelm could be solved If it can be solved.

As I have stated before ... I would propose two sovereign nations with full control of their own border and destiny. I will let the people who live there decide what they can agree upon to be an acceptable compromise - but in general terms it should be where they were before the occupation started. And anyone should have free access to their respective places of worship in Jerusalem. I truly believe something I have once heard somewhere : "If Jews practiced the real teachings of Moses(pbuh), and Christians practiced the real teachings of Jesus(pbuh) and Muslims practiced the real teachings of Muhammad(pbuh) - we will have the most peaceful co-existence ever". However, given the state of affairs of believers from all those faiths, I honestly do not see any solution happening to this problem anytime soon.

As asked in the Qur'an to stand up for Justice even if it be against your own self,"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. "(Al Qur'an 4:135); I would try my best to not follow my hearts desire in coming up with the solution. But I totally understand that it is extremely hard in the face of injustice, oppression and arrogance.

Finally, since you wanted to know I would tell you the Prophecies from the Islamic perspecive, that is, the Anti-Christ will be ruling the world from Jerusalem before Imam Mahdi and Jesus(pbuh) arrives and fights the anti-Christ. Even if there are some guesstimates floating around from all sorts of groups, no one really knows when that will happen. So for each of us who may or may not witness those events, it is in our best interest to act in accordance with Justice rather than to try to act in order to fulfill those prophecies. Hope this answers your question.

Peace.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

As I have stated before ... I would propose two sovereign nations with full control of their own border and destiny. I will let the people who live there decide what they can agree upon to be an acceptable compromise - but in general terms it should be where they were before the occupation started. And anyone should have free access to their respective places of worship in Jerusalem. I truly believe something I have once heard somewhere : "If Jews practiced the real teachings of Moses(pbuh), and Christians practiced the real teachings of Jesus(pbuh) and Muslims practiced the real teachings of Muhammad(pbuh) - we will have the most peaceful co-existence ever". However, given the state of affairs of believers from all those faiths, I honestly do not see any solution happening to this problem anytime soon.

Salaam.

We may have the opportunity of reopening this discussion under somewhat different ground rules in the near future. If and when that occurs, I'd be interested in hearing your views on the Arab Jewish refugees from the surrounding countries and what role their plight can or should play in the equation.

 

[loverOfTruth]

Salaam.

We may have the opportunity of reopening this discussion under somewhat different ground rules in the near future. If and when that occurs, I'd be interested in hearing your views on the Arab Jewish refugees from the surrounding countries and what role their plight can or should play in the equation.

Salaam...God Willing ... but I honestly need to do more reading on that subject before I can objectively contribute to a valuable discussion. But thanks for bringing that up - that would give me another avenue for learning and reminds me of how little we know compared to the knowledge of God as stated in the Qur'an :
"Say, 'If the sea were ink for [writing] the words of my Lord, the sea would be exhausted before the words of my Lord were exhausted, even if We brought the like of it as a supplement.'" (Al Qur'an 18:109)