Our Children Are The Guarantors

Defending Zionism from its detractors. Anti-Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism. Let the other side apologize for a change.

Sunday, April 08, 2007

Testing For Consistency

Let’s see how consistent our average pro-“Palestinian” is. For Britain you can substitute any country a nation other than the current inhabiting one has a claim on. As usual, I welcome anyone else to improve upon my pathetic graphic design skills.

Drawing: Top: "Do you think the Celts have a Right of Return?", beside map of Irish, Scots and Welsh going to other parts of Britain; Middle: map of people from the 1967 territories going to 1949 Armistice Line Israel, beside "If not, why do you think the 'Palestinians'do?"; Bottom: "If so, why do you think the Jews don't?", beside map of people returning to the Land of Israel from all the world.

Awaiting answers… And consider also this: two out of the three peoples mentioned in the drawing are real. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find out the odd man out.

Labels: , ,


Blogger Chas said...

Your attempt to compare "Celtic", "Jewish" and "Palestinian" rights of return is amusing but hardly informative.
As a "Celt" I could return to my ancestral homeland (Scotland) any time I wished .. I could buy property there, eventually I could vote there if I so wished.
But it is 300 years since my ancestors left Scotland.
If I were Jewish I could "return" to Israel no matter how tenuous or remote my ancestral connection may be.
However if I am Palestinian I cannot return to land to which I may well have legal title, where I or my parents actually have lived, if that land is now claimed by Israel.

I understand very well that a return of Palestinians to their own land, even if that return were limited only to those with credible title to land or property would be unsustainable for Israel, but attempting to make the discussion of such rights appear ridiculous is disingenuous.

April 08, 2007 7:50 PM  
Blogger ziontruth said...


This is a war, so it's not like anything either of the sides says can be regarded as "information".

You can return to any place in Britain you wish. If, however, Celtic nationalists stated their goal as, "Driving out all the Sassenach colonialist invaders out of Celtic Britain", then you'd get a situation comparable to what we Israeli Jews are facing.

If you're Jewish then you have a connection to this land, period. There aren't any degrees of Jewish ancestry or connection to this land. One is either Jewish or not, except for conversion to Judaism, which is a demanding process, discouraged by the rabbis so as to filter in the serious ones.

The "Palestinians" are not a real nation any more than the "Iraqis" are. In the case of Iraq, the British colonialists just cut out a territory out of lands with various people (Sunnis, Shi'ites, Kurds etc.); the Left's talk of "the Iraqi nation" is, in great irony, a perpetuation of the colonialist status quo. Likewise, the "Palestinians" are nothing but the Arabs that happen to be situated on the Land of Israel; they are not a nation in their own right (and see my post The Californian Nation for more about that). Their claim of nationhood is a recent invention, meant to gain sympathy in the eyes of those who hold to the Post-Colonial Narrative; in reality, they are and have always been the local chapter of the worldwide Islamic jihad against the non-Muslims.

You say, "[...] but attempting to make the discussion of such rights appear ridiculous is disingenuous". There is a grain of truth here, but it was not we Israeli Jews who framed this conflict as an "indigenous land rights" issue in the first place. I will continue with what I'm doing until the false narrative of this conflict as a land dispute between two peoples, rather than the truth that it is just another instance of the global conflict between Islam and the rest of the world, is discarded.

Thanks for the comment.

April 09, 2007 9:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home