Skip to main content
CNN revises history by not telling enough:



CNN.com - Mideast 101: Who are Palestinian refugees? - April 10, 2002



The United Nations Relief and Works Agency defines "Palestinian refugees" as "persons [and their descendants] whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict."
Interesting UN definition. "1948 Arab-Israeli conflict" was Israel's War of Independence.



While there only 914,000 such refugees in 1950, the number had grown to 3.9 million by 2001. The vast majority -- some 2.7 million people -- do not live in camps, but in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

The remainder live in 59 poor, crowded camps -- about half in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon and the rest in the West Bank and Gaza.
So, somehow the overwhelming majority of these "refugees" have been able to acquire jobs and setup households in other countries.



The United Nations runs the camps, but other nations foot the bill. Most of the $414 million for the camps last year came from European countries, $123 million (or 30 percent) from the United States, while Arab countries -- including Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority -- paid a total of $7 million.
I thought all the Arab countries were terribly concerned about the "Palestinian issue." So why don't they contribute any money to these camps, instead leaving the bill to Europe and the US? I guess they just can't afford it....

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Have I mentioned I saw Monsters vs. Aliens?

It’s possible that Pixar is becoming a blight on the world of animation. Yes, they do some really great work ( The Incredibles , Ratatouille ), but they’ve also done some clunkers ( Cars , Wall-E ). Their greatest sin, though, is that they apparently radiate a variation of the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, so that any other animated film – especially if done with CG – is automatically judged inferior. There is some justification to this, but you don’t see every live action film being compared to, say, the films of Ingmar Bergman (well, except by brooding people wearing dark glasses sitting in dim coffee shops smoking clove cigarettes discussing cinema, damn you ). In the traditional film world, it’s accepted that different artists turn out different products. In the animated world, everyone is supposed to match or surpass Pixar, or so it seems. Needless to say, that’s just a crock. Monsters vs Aliens is to your typical Pixar production as Spielberg is to Scorsese. And I h...
2 comments
Read more

Rogan

The entire Joe Rogan controversy is an example of the kids being left in charge and the adults refusing to teach them any better. I’m not a regular consumer of podcasts. There are a couple I listen to from time to time, but nothing on a regular basis. While I’ve caught a few minutes of the Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube, I’ve never listened to his podcast. One of the primary reasons for that is that you have to subscribe to Spotify to do so, and I prefer Qobuz, Tidal, or even Amazon Music. Rogan is behind Spotify’s paywall and that’s that. But the nature of the fight is about more than who does or does not listen to Rogan. This fight goes to the very nature of the First Amendment and the fundamental concept of the United States. And yes, I understand that cuts both ways. What’s his name and Joni Mitchell are free to yank their creations from Spotify, no ifs, ands, or buts. I’m not denying their right, I’m questioning their reasons. Rogan talks to people. He does so largely unfiltered....
Post a Comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more