Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (62025)	12/16/2002 8:25:35 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Or that the Arabs were more likely to create mayhem, and thus needed appeasing more. Practically speaking, it was much easier to stop Jewish immigration than Arab immigration, so that's what they did. Is this really so unnatural? If you are administering a territory, and a particular form of immigration is causing a violently negative reaction from the existing population, isn't it quite natural to restrict that form of immigration, and not to restrict other forms that are not resulting in mayhem? What is so surprising about this? By the way, the idea that the Arabs were creating more mayhem seems somewhat at odds with your earlier contention that the Colonial Office preferred dealing with the Arabs because they were less demanding and more easily managed.