Were Palestinians expelled or fled?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

That old adage applies: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Will not argue wit this. I also see us in this light.

[luckytxn 2,264]

That old adage applies: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Can't argue since I agree again. Maybe happy hour will be over soon.

[Pooky 3,786]

Although much is heard about the plight of the Palestinian refugees, little is said about the Jews who fled from Arab states. Their situation had long been precarious. During the 1947 UN debates, Arab leaders threatened them.

For example, Egypt's delegate told the General Assembly: "The lives of one million Jews in Muslim countries would be jeopardized by partition."

The number of Jews fleeing Arab countries for Israel in the years following Israel's independence was roughly equal to the number of Arabs leaving Palestine. Many Jews were allowed to take little more than the shirts on their backs. These refugees had no desire to be repatriated. Little is heard about them because they did not remain refugees for long. Of the 820,000 Jewish refugees, 586,000 were resettled in Israel at great expense, and without any offer of compensation from the Arab governments who confiscated their possessions. Israel has consequently maintained that any agreement to compensate the Palestinian refugees must also include Arab compensation for Jewish refugees. To this day, the Arab states have refused to pay any compensation to the hundreds of thousands of Jews who were forced to abandon their property before fleeing those countries. The contrast between the reception of Jewish refugees in Israel with the reception of Palestinian refugees in Arab countries is even more stark when one considers the difference in cultural and geographic dislocation experienced by the two groups. Most Jewish refugees traveled hundreds —and some traveled thousands — of miles to a tiny country whose inhabitants spoke a different language. Most Arab refugees never left Palestine at all; they traveled a few miles to the other side of the truce line, remaining inside the vast Arab nation that they were part of linguistically, culturally and ethnically.

DO you have any corroboration for this?

[mawilson 2,133]

DO you have any corroboration for this?

Those are well known facts.

Jewish Exodus from Arab and Muslim countries

[Pooky 3,786]

Those are well known facts.

Jewish Exodus from Arab and Muslim countries

Not a fan of Wikipedia, but I'll take a look at the references.

Thanks

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I used to be an editor on Wikipedia and it's rife with editors who hold anti-Islam views. Their articles are not balanced at all. Zionism is firmly embedded there.

Not a fan of Wikipedia, but I'll take a look at the references.

Thanks

[mawilson 2,133]

I used to be an editor on Wikipedia and it's rife with editors who hold anti-Islam views. Their articles are not balanced at all. Zionism is firmly embedded there.

Zionists are everywhere!!!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Even among avowed atheists!

Zionists are everywhere!!!

[Pooky 3,786]

I used to be an editor on Wikipedia and it's rife with editors who hold anti-Islam views. Their articles are not balanced at all. Zionism is firmly embedded there.

So, on the chance that the article may provide an insight into the Arab World's treatment of Jews from around the time of partition to the present day, I have to be advised that Wikipedia is predominately Zionist? Before I even read the first of the references? Really?

What are you afraid of?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That's why terrorism continues in the ME. The Zionists used to it cow the British into supporting the creation of a Jewish state. The founding heroes of Israel had bloody hands. It's a lesson well learned that if you want land for your people, you blow things up. Eventually, everyone conveniently forgets your nation was born in terrorism.

Worked for British colonies around the world, from the US to India.

Americans can't fathom that we also used terrorism to found our own country.

Bingo!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

So, on the chance that the article may provide an insight into the Arab World's treatment of Jews from around the time of partition to the present day, I have to be advised that Wikipedia is predominately Zionist? Before I even read the first of the references? Really?

What are you afraid of?

Yes, really. Why do I have to be afraid of something in order to make that factual statement based on my first hand experience behind the scenes of Wikipedia? not to mention Mark's own personal bias. I'm not even the first one to say it, and it is notable that the site owners acknowledge it.

A solid tenet of research is to explore the motivation and pov of the author of the sources you are examining. If the author has a bias, his sources will share that bias. I'm sure it's not against the TOS to offer this advisory.

Don't be so touchy, jeez.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Sofiyya

[Pooky 3,786]

Don't be so touchy, jeez.

Take your own advice sometime. Take time to understand what checking references actually means. Then take some time to realise just how condescending your interjection made you look.

I am well aware of the bias on show. Let me make my own assessments.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I already know what checking references means. I didn't stop you from making any assessments of your own by issuing a warning based on fact. You can do as you like, and I'm sure you will, so you should consider that I can do as I like, and I will, including issuing advice about Wikipedia or any other source of information I'm very familiar with.

If that's being condescending, well, touchy is the word.

Take your own advice sometime. Take time to understand what checking references actually means. Then take some time to realise just how condescending your interjection made you look.

I am well aware of the bias on show. Let me make my own assessments.

[mawilson 2,133]

issuing a warning based on fact

It's a fact that Wikipedia is predominantly Zionist? Not an opinion?

[Pooky 3,786]

I already know what checking references means. I didn't stop you from making any assessments of your own by issuing a warning based on fact. You can do as you like, and I'm sure you will, so you should consider that I can do as I like, and I will, including issuing advice about Wikipedia or any other source of information I'm very familiar with.

If that's being condescending, well, touchy is the word.

Yes, it is.

It's a fact that Wikipedia is predominantly Zionist? Not an opinion?

Are we back to fact vs. opinion again?

That's so yesterday