From Klipkaps posting it maybe thought that Palestinians were flocking to Cis Jordan as the Jewish farms were extremely potent, and awash with modern technology. So how come during the period of 1922 to 1930 there was an exodus of Palestinians?

Immigration into Palestine

Jew Christian Muslim
Year Immi Emig Immi Emig Immi Emig Total
1923 7,421 3466 402 713 168 768 7991
1924 12,856 507 510 353 187 251 13,553
1925 33,801 2151 741 1201 96 748 34,641
1926 13,081 7965 611 1505 218 559 13,910
1927 2,713 5071 758 813 124 1094 3595
1928 2178 2168 710 547 198 407 3086
1929 5249 1746 1117 792 200 297 6566
1930 2568 739 480 166 60 161 3108
Total 81,283 23457 5370 6198 1267 4387 87920
Net 57826 -798 -3120
Percentage 92.5% 6.1% 1.4% 100%

From Appendix 22 to
PALESTINE.
Report on
Immigration, Land Settlement
and Development.
By
SIR JOHN HOPE SIMPSON, C.I.E.
1930
Presented by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to
Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
October, 1930

http://domino.un.org/pdfs/appendices.pdf

http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/e3ed8720f8707c9385256d19004f057c!OpenDocument

The fellah as a cultivator.The fellah is neither lazy nor unintelligent. He is a competent and capable agriculturist, and there is little doubt that were he to be given the chance of learning better methods, and the capital, which is a necessary preliminary to their employment, he would rapidly improve his position. Meanwhile, however, the income which he can procure from his inadequate farm is insufficient to maintain him in a decent standard of comfort and leaves no margin whatever for improvements.

Expenditure by KerenKayemeth and KerenHayesod.The amounts spent by these two agencies have been formidable, and it is quite impossible that they will ever be repaid in full. In the former case no question of repayment arises, as the land is not to be sold to the settlers. Yet it is certain that no adequate interest in the form of rent could be paid by the settlers on the outlay of the Fund on their holdings. In the case of the KerenHayesod also the outlay has been lavish, and the whole of the colonies are so overcapitalised that it will prove essential both to write off a considerable amount of the outlay and to fix the rate of interest on the balance at an uneconomic level if the outlay is to be liquidated. The Jewish National Fund and the KerenHayesod have very kindly submitted consolidated statements of their expenditure, which are printed as Appendices 8 and 9 to this Report. In the former, excluding the items " Urban Land ", " Urban Buildings ", and " Lands ", the sum of £1,545,659 appears to have been spent on agricultural colonisation. In the latter, the items " Urban Colonisation ", " National Organisations ", " Investments ", and " Jewish National Fund " do not appear to be expenditure on colonisation in the country. The balance is £3,345,531. Adding these two sums together, the total cost of agricultural colonisation by the Zionist Organisation appears to have been £4,891,190.* The number of persons actually settled for this sum is shown in Appendix 10a statement submitted by the Jewish agency.
Population of settlements.The total population of the Zionist settlements in 1930 (included therein being the " supported settlements ") consisted of 4,406 adults, and 2,364 children under 15 years of age. The cost of colonisation of a family has thus been very large.

" Article 11.The settler undertakes to work the said holding personally, or with the aid of his family, and not to hire any outside labour except Jewish labourers."

Zionist policy in regard to Arabs in their colonies.The above quoted provisions sufficiently illustrate the Zionist policy with regard to the Arabs in their colonies. Attempts are constantly being made to establish the advantage which Jewish settlement has brought to the Arab. The most lofty sentiments are ventilated at public meetings and in Zionist propaganda. At the time of the Zionist Congress in 1921 a resolution was passed which '' solemnly declared the desire of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people in relations of friendship and mutual respect, and, together with the Arab people, to develop the homeland common to both into a prosperous community which would ensure the growth of the peoples." This resolution is frequently quoted in proof of the excellent sentiments which Zionism cherishes towards the people of Palestine. The provisions quoted above, which are included in legal documents binding on every settler in a Zionist colony, are not compatible with the sentiments publicly expressed.

The same remark applies to the following extract from the Memorandum submitted by the General Federation of Jewish Labour to the " Palestine Commission of Enquiry " (i.e., the Commission on the Palestine disturbances of August, 1929) :

" The Jewish Labour Movement considers the Arab population as an integral element in this country. It is not to be thought of that Jewish settlers should displace this population, nor establish themselves at its expense. This would not only be impossible both from the political and economic standpoint, but it would run counter to the moral conception lying at the root of the Zionist movement. Jewish immigrants who come to this country to live by their own labour regard the Arab working man as their compatriot and fellow worker, whose needs are their needs and whose future is their future."

The effect of the Zionist colonisation policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialised. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land. Nor can anyone help him by purchasing the land and restoring it to common use. The land is in mortmain and inalienable. It is for this reason that Arabs discount the professions of friendship and good will on the part of the Zionists in view of the policy which the Zionist Organisation deliberately adopted.

As can be seen from the above report there were no extra jobs in the area from Zionist colonisation. And the Land was not farmed by the Arabs which reinforces the palestinian Arab exodus from the area, there was no immigration of Arabs at all. A field mouse plague was caused by Zionist farming causing problems for the Arabs in the area.

The colonists have not yet begun to repay any of the money due to the KerenHayesod for installation, nor is rent being paid to the KerenKayemeth.

The colonists were getting supported from outside sources not from their own endevours.

Thanks for the additional reference by someone who has little reason to fabricate evidence for his report.

This timely contribution from Ashly hammers another, and very stoutly robust, nail into the Immigration coffin.

The statistical refutation of this myth and the references to demonstrate that the main source for Zionist insistence on this mantra, Ms Peter's publication, was thoroughly trashed in the following thread:

http://www.politicalforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=20411

I think that everything reasonable has been done to assign "Myth 2 - the Palestinians are recent immigrants" firmly onto the junk pile.

But do not fear. It will come back as a "truth" in the not too distant futute. Such is the nature of the Zionist Myths.

Silly men...
a) There are no "Palestinian" people.
b) Of course the formation of Israel displaced Arabs. So did the formation of Jordan; Syria; Lebanon: Saudi Arabia; and Iraq, just to name a few immediate neighbors.
"The southern Levant?" That's a Catch-22. The vast majority of Arabs were indigenous to what is today Lebanon; Iraq; Syria; Israel; and Jordan. They lived there then. They live there now.
Eh? No, they were required to co-exist peaceably with the State of Israel. As those that left Israel in '48 and '49 owed their allegiances to an Arab world that was hostile to Israel, those that commanded their allegiances were responsible to absorb them...

__________________
"There is no way this winter is ever going to end as long as that groundhog keeps seeing his shadow.... He's got to be stopped. And I have to stop him."

Moishe, do you still insist that the majority of Palestinians immigrated to the "conflict area" at the turn of the last century (your original thesis) or for that matter at any other time?

That is the essence of the myth.

Nope.
That's not what you wrote above.
As you previously noted, I have given up trying to convince y'all on that argument. I find the numbers specious and you believe yours, I believe mine, and never the twain shall meet.
So, no, I do not "insist." I do find y'all's beliefs illogical, but as I am not going to endlessly crunch numbers for mutual stupeficaction, I will pass forever more on this argument.
However, do you disagree with my response to your specific post?

__________________
"There is no way this winter is ever going to end as long as that groundhog keeps seeing his shadow.... He's got to be stopped. And I have to stop him."

Moishe, you don't have to crunch the numbers. But saying that "we" are illogical, but not saying where or how, lands with a hollow clang. Because it is empty.

Sure, I will reply, but with little enthusiasm, because you seem to have totally missed the structure and intent of these posts.
Moishe, sorry, it is you who have slipped off the logic rails. I am not taking this position. These are not my Myths. You seem to have missed the very essence of my presentation. I am paraphrasing what I have seen innumerable times in print; not presenting the proposition. Rather ask the Zionist posters and web sites who maintain these positions why they don't want to fly in the face of the 4th Geneva Convention.

What I am doing is to tabulate their claims and then to try to refute them. I do not to make these ridiculous claims!! Good grief, I would have thought that was crystal clear.

Different mistake to the above, Moishe. I don't claim anything unique about Israel, except perhaps that most of these events occurred after the Geneva Conventions were in place.

I agree in part. The word Palestinians is new and indeed post-dates the creation of Israel (I think). But it nonetheless refers to a "people", modern though the definition and identity might be, and not some new kids on the block. These "people" have been there for many millenia. You cannot make them irrelevant by denying them a name with a modern context.

They were and are the Canaanites that A'bram, the father of the Hebrews, encountered on his trek south from Syria. The fact that they were not called Palestinians then or in 1880 or 1947 is irrelevant. They were there - farming the same olives and almonds on their ancestral grounds as they did in 1945. What label you prefer to paste on their foreheads does not change that.

It is the human rights and respect for people who remained there for eons, many of them with Jewish genes, and not semantics, that are at stake here.

Moishe3rd wrote

But Moishe you have not come up with any numbers only spurious arguments and hearsay that you believe. No evidence of any kind to back your claims.

Moishe3rd you wrote:

Those that had non aggression pacts with the Zionists ended up being expelled.

Abdullah took up Faysal’s pro Jewish stance and continued with a positive attitude towards the growing Jewish community in Palestine. In 1922 he met Chaim Weizman in London.

The Palestinian Arabs were in opposition to the Zionist settlements in Palestine.

Faysal once he was ensconced in Baghdad lost interest in the Jewish affairs up to his death in 1931.

An explanation for Abdullah’ lack of “anti-Semitism” is that his national interest lay with the Zionists causes; he had expansionist ideals (the West Bank). His attitude was confrontational to the Palestinian Nationalist movement aspirations. Abdullah’s unique position towards Israel can be seen during the 1936-1939 Palestinian Arab revolt when it was suggested by the British that Abdullah annex the densely Arab populated areas to Jordan as introduced by the Peel commission.

This annexation became a cornerstone of the Jewish agency and Jordanian Policy.

With the adoption of this Policy the opinions of the British Palestinians, US and the Arab league were ignored. Only with the ending of the Mandate did the British support Abdullah in his and the Jewish agency policy.

Abdullah probably would have absorbed them even though he did not command their allegiances if the annexation had occurred. Israel did not want to allow passage through to the Mediterranean Sea and linking to Gaza. It would have been in Israel’s interest not to create a hostile civilian population on their doorstep. But Israel decided that not backing down would produce better results. It looks like the Israelis made a bad choice.

We went throught this before. You choose to believe that the population growth in Israel was a natural process based on simple population growth I cited stats that say it wasn't.
The main stat is the overwhelmingly huge growth as compared to Asia or anywhere else in the rest of the world.
We are not going to agree on this, so, you win.

__________________
"There is no way this winter is ever going to end as long as that groundhog keeps seeing his shadow.... He's got to be stopped. And I have to stop him."

Anywhere else in the world?? Zionist blinkers Moishe. Not true - not at all - let me remind you.

Firstly the premise was not for what is now Israel. Remember the Peters' fatal flaw in statistical methodology?

Secondly, forget comparisons with Asia. They are irrelevant compared to comparisons with population growths for the same period with Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, etc. These are infinitely more pertinent and show comparable levels of growth (see quote below).

So can I add another Zionist myth? It goes like this:
"Population growths pre-1948, in what is now Palestine, were higher than for those countries from which the Palestinian Arabs were meant to have emigrated to the "Holy Land". Or if you want irrelevant stats, higher than for those of Asia."

You see the problem don't you Moishe. If the Palestinians were meant to have left these countries to follow the Zionists, then the neighbouring countries' populations should have fallen.

Palestinian ladies have lots of babies Moishe. I have drawn your attention to this fact on two previous occasions, but you prefer your Zionist mantra.

But the Knesset is very well aware of this fact Moishe. They are only too worried that the percentage of Palestinians in Israel is creeping up every year and threatening Rabin's sacred proportion of 20%. These ladies have lots of babies Moishe.