In 1967, according to these numbers, 86 percent of Israel was Jews, with about 400,000 being Arabs and others. In 1995, 80 percent of the population is still Jewish, but the Arab population has almost tripled to 1,069,000. No. The population that's reported is "Arabs and others". In other words, all non-Jews. I suspect that the numbers are done this way deliberately to mislead, but as you say: no conclusions can be drawn.

There is only one data point for the Gaza Strip and West Bank, so I don't see how conclusions can be drawn for those areas.

Statistically, yes. But it's another conspicuous absence. We know that Jews had a very small, if any, presence in WB and Gaza. We know that they have been settling those areas. So we know that the percent of Jews went from somewhere near 0% to something higher than that. Why is it easier to publish census numbers for Arabs, than for Jews? I guess that Israel would make sure that no census is ever taken of the settlers. But you are right: the numbers are missing, so no conclusions can be drawn.

It would also be instructive to know what was meant by "Palestine" before the British mandate that created it.

The last time I published this, I spent more time on analysis and explanation. You are right. It's impossible for me to determine how Palestine compares to Palestine (British Mandate) compares to Israel. My take on it is that the two Palestines match pretty well, since their numbers are in line with each other.

The only number for decent comparison between Palestine and Israel is 449K Jews in '39 Palestine vs. 554K Jews in Israel in '45. This seems roughly in line with what you might expect. But I suspect that the Jews (during the prior 950 years, anyway) have tended to stay to the coast, in the larger cities. This means that the Jewish population of (what is now) Israel proper would closely match the Jewish population of a much larger region.

I've looked over the chart in your link several times, and am having trouble figuring out where Jews are "pushing" Arabs out of Israel...

If Arabs are dwindling in Israel, I don't see it in this particular reference....

I suppose you could argue that many more Arabs might be living there if the Jews had never arrived...

I guess I mislead you. I'm not suggesting that the Israelis have been loading Palestinians onto boats and dropping them off elsewhere. A couple of analogies come to mind here, illustrating different facets.

The first analogy is when a group of one class of families start to move into a neighborhood where families of a different class used to hold sway. You can use new money/old money, clelbrity/surf punk, Viet Namese/Texan, black/white, white/black or whatever you like, to make the point with. When a bunch of "others" move in to areas, the locals typically do not welcome them. This is not what Jesus taught, but it is normal human behavior.

The original group-members do either of three things: 1) They move away from the obnoxious new-comers (this is the "pushing out" part), or 2) they stick around with hatred for the new-comers and what they have done to your neighborhood, or 3) they stick around and try to make the best of things.

The second analogy is the American West, manifest destiny, and the indians. I worry that a supporter of unrestricted growth may have trouble following this, but try to suspend your disbelief for a sec. The indians had a lifestyle (a bunch of different ones, actually) that required a low population density, and restraint of development. Americans came along and killed off the buffalo, fenced in the ranges, built population centers around transportation and economics nodes, found indians in inconvenient spots and forcibly moved them off or killed them off.

They transformed the West without anything like the permission of the existing inhabitants. Now I appreciate that by many standards of judgement, America has improved by this action. It can support more people and generate more wealth than ever before. But it was our dream, not theirs, and we pushed them aside.

This is happening again in the mid-east. The population density and wealth-production is increasing. Should the original inhabitants have a say? Probably, human nature being what it is, they think they should be the ones *directing* the future of this area. One thing for sure: In the imperialistic times when we did it to the indians, nobody cared but the indians. The Israelis have to do their version of manifest destiny on a global stage. The whole world is watching.

All analogies aside, here's what I see in the statistics:

In the early 20s, Jews represented 11% of the population.

By '45, Jews represented 31% of the population.

By '67, Jews represented 85% of the population (admittedly you run into the issue of the comparatibility of the Palestine/Israel numbers).

By '96, Jews represented 81% of the population.

You go from a population of 84K to 4.5M. Thats a 5,400% increase.

In the same period of time, non-Arabs go from 673K to 1.069M. About a 60% increase. This number has the flaw that it possibly does not include Gaza and West Bank numbers. Best I can do.

How is it you can look at these numbers and not see a compulsory time-bomb ticking away? I really don't get it.

By the way, if you compare the area of the Arab nations with Israel, your Texas analogy might be better if you used a state that is sized like Israel in comparison with the rest of the U.S. I think Connecticut is about right.

Size does not matter! (I'm 5'5")