That is the only thing I need to know. This fact is not further examined by you or by the MSM.

Hey Dan. Well, perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. Absolutely, I agree that a successful refugee camp is a way-station to a better life. My point was that Israel resettled the Jewish refugees from Arab lands. But where Palestinian refugees attempted to resettle, at least as a temporary solution until the formation of a Palestinian state, into Arab lands, they were almost uniformly rejected. The Arab states and Palestinians might take their cue from the Israelis, who did not hesitate to let in their brethren in desperate need.

I understand the logic that Palestinians are afraid their claim to the land will diminish if they try to make a better life somewhere else (eg. if a bunch of Gazans decided to settle in Egypt or Jordan, they might be seen as giving up any ties to villages in Israel they used to claim as a home). But in the meantime, about 4 million Palestinians have been stuck in limbo as stateless, impoverished refugees for decades — and the vast majority of these people weren’t even alive during the initial conflict of 1948, or even in 1967. I propose that the humane thing to do to relieve this suffering is to resettle at least some of these people into the Arab world, where they do share links of culture, religion, tradition, and even blood ties. Wait for a final and lasting peace in the Middle East for a resolution to this situation and these poor people might just be there for decades longer — or indefinitely.

Wouldn’t a successful refugee camp be one that closes, after all the people go to new, safe homes, away from a war zone?

I know this is beside the point you’ve made, but what do you make of UNRWA? Are you convinced they’ve been mis-managed and given inadvertent support to Hamas? What do you make of ‘Setting the record straight?’

http://www.un.org/unrwa/allegations/index.html