From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Who are the Occupiers?
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 05:00:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.032516.13425@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:
 
# In article 1132@ennews.eas.asu.edu, makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:

# >In article <1992Sep7.022344.27498@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:

# ># In article 26010@discus.technion.ac.il, davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami) writes:

# ># >                                                             There was
# ># >no such thing - they were "Syrians of the South" and no more than that.
# ># >many Arabs from all over the Arab world Egypt,Sudan,Syria flowed into 
# ># >the country since the 1910s - they have not the flimisiest right to 
# ># >sit here on the expense of prosecuted Jews who finally came to rest.

# ># I see, the Massive Recent Immigration myth.  It has been debunked so
# ># many times that it must take some courage to still believe it.
# ># Congratulations.

# >	What takes courage is to repeat this idiocy.  The only way it can
# >be debunked is to assume an irregular diet (consisting almost
# >exclusively of citrus) that no one could live under.  This diet is
# >probably what allowed the irregular reproduction patterns necessary
# >which .... is to what leads Brendan to assume that this is a myth.  Of
# >course all of these (no matter how many sources they have to back them
# >up) are just another way of claiming 2+2=5.  I would not believe a PhD
# >im math who told me that no matter how many sources he had.
 
# Or, to put it another way, you believe what you have to believe and no
# amount of contrary evidence can shake you.  So be it.

	When it comes to something apriori, the only evidence that can
shake it has to do with the foundations of the belief.  This is as it
should be, and there is nothing wrong ith it.  On the contrary, since
you attempt to debunk this every time despite evidence to the
contrary, I believe this charge applies to you.

# Maybe you are
# right: it could be that the Ottomans couldn't distinguish between
# Arabs and oranges and so counted both together.

	Funny - NOT.  What is improtant is that for certian things to be
true, other things also have to be true.  If there was a large
population, there must be food to support it.  The only evidence that
is of any value that shows enough food is for citrus (What I mean by
any value is total, and not relative numbers.  For instance, a 200%
increase means nothing if it means a growth of 1 to 3.).

	Now this  whole argument may be ridiculous since the other day I
saw one of the "palestinian?" negotiators to the peace talks say (I
think it was Saed Erekat) that at the time of the British mandate there
were were about 600,000 "palestinians?".  If so, that is such a small
amount (I believe there are around 5-6 million people there now and there
is still an awful lot of empty land) that it does not matter if they
all originated there.  (of course, they would have a lot of explaining
to do for how they grew to today's numbers, similar to how the number
of people who were at Don Larsen's perfect World Series game is now in
the millions).
--

David Makowsky
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.greek,soc.culture.europe